| From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Can't find docs on Postgresql.conf |
| Date: | 2001-11-07 01:32:56 |
| Message-ID: | 200111070132.fA71Wuv10666@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-sql |
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > Doesn't it store in pg_proc as an array, which is of variable length?
>
> No, it's *fixed* length. Increasing FUNC_MAX_ARGS translates directly
> to wasted space.
Oh, I see it now, it is our old friend 'oidvector'. Now I remember
modifying that when we changed from 8 to 16.
I have modified the TODO to say:
* Increase maximum number of function parameters if little
wasted space
We can address this during 7.3. and decide if it is worth it. Maybe it
isn't. My calculations show a change of proc params from 16 to 32
would increase tuple length for pg_proc change from 180 to 244 or a 35%
increase.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2001-11-07 01:34:58 | Re: Increasing MAX_ARGS |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2001-11-07 00:45:00 | Re: Can't find docs on Postgresql.conf |