Re: Document parameter count limit

On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 4:13 PM David G. Johnston <
david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 4:08 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
>> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
>> > Ah, I was confused. I documented both in the attached patch.
>>
>> The function one should have the same annotation as some others:
>>
>> <entry>can be increased by recompiling
>> <productname>PostgreSQL</productname></entry>
>>
>>
> I'd like to see a comment on the parameter count one too.
>
> "Alternatives include using a temporary table or passing them in as a
> single array parameter."
>
> About the only time this is likely to come up is with many parameters of
> the same type and meaning, pointing that out with the array option seems
> excessively wordy for the comment area.
>
> Needs a comma: 65,535
>
> Kinda think both should be tacked on to the end of the table. I'd also
> put function arguments first so it appears under the compile time partition
> keys limit.
>
>
Cleanups for consistency:

Move "identifier length" after "partition keys" (before the new "function
arguments")

Add commas to: 1,600 and 1,664 and 8,192

David J.