From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)atentus(dot)com> |
Cc: | Rod Taylor <rbt(at)zort(dot)ca>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [PATCHES] [SQL] 16 parameter limit |
Date: | 2002-04-16 03:44:16 |
Message-ID: | 200204160344.g3G3iGg04889@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches pgsql-sql |
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> (Tom Lane says both SQL92 and SQL99 specify 128 as the maximun
> identifier length)
>
> Anyway, how does one measure the perfomance impact of such a change?
> By merely changing the constant definition, or also by actually using
> long identifiers? I can do that if it's of any help, for various values
> perhaps.
I think I would measure disk size change in a newly created database,
and run regression for various values. That uses a lot of identifier
lookups.
--
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 | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2002-04-16 03:49:30 | Re: [PATCHES] [SQL] 16 parameter limit |
Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2002-04-16 03:42:35 | Re: [PATCHES] [SQL] 16 parameter limit |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2002-04-16 03:49:30 | Re: [PATCHES] [SQL] 16 parameter limit |
Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2002-04-16 03:42:35 | Re: [PATCHES] [SQL] 16 parameter limit |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2002-04-16 03:49:30 | Re: [PATCHES] [SQL] 16 parameter limit |
Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2002-04-16 03:42:35 | Re: [PATCHES] [SQL] 16 parameter limit |