Re: export FUNC_MAX_ARGS as a read-only GUC variable

Joe Conway wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > One could make a good case that INDEX_MAX_KEYS should be exported along
> > with FUNC_MAX_ARGS, rather than letting people write client code that
> > assumes they are the same.
> >
> > I was intending to propose that we also export the following as
> > read-only variables:
> > * NAMEDATALEN
> > * BLCKSZ
> > * integer-vs-float datetime flag
>
> OK, the attached includes the above -- result looks like:
>
> regression=# select * from pg_settings where category like 'Compile%';
> -[ RECORD 1 ]----------------------------------------------
> name | block_size

OK. Should that be page_size? Not sure but block size sounds more like
a hardware setting. I know we call it BLCKSZ in our code but page size
seems more appropriate. Not sure.

> name | func_max_args
> name | index_max_keys

Should that be max_func_args and max_index_args? Seems more natural.
Should we spell out function? Probably. We already have
check_*function*_bodies.

> name | integer_datetimes
> short_desc | Datetimes are integer based

This one has me confused. "Datetimes are integer based" is a statement,
as is the variable name. Should it be "integer_datetime_storage" or
something else?

> name | name_data_len

Is "name" a good description, or is "identifier" better, identifier_length?

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073