| From: | Ralph Graulich <maillist(at)shauny(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: size of function body |
| Date: | 2002-07-16 22:12:13 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.21.0207162358340.9511-100000@shauny.shauny.de |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Hi Tom,
> Hmm. Are there any long literal strings in your function text?
Sorry for asking more questions to track down the problem:
What exactly do you mean by "long literal string"? Does it mean the length
of a variable name or the length of the content of a variable?
The longest variable names are:
running_total_of_coverings_by_same_family_sire
running_total_of_coverings_by_different_family_sire
running_total_of_active_breeding_years
But only used three or four times.
But I do concatenating of string lots of time within the code, which means
I store several derived variable contents into one single variable and put
that in a TEXT field in an UPDATE statement. Can this cause the problem
you described?
Nonetheless I am willing to try the patch, for sure!
Kind regards
... Ralph ...
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-07-16 22:24:20 | Re: size of function body |
| Previous Message | Johnson, Shaunn | 2002-07-16 21:52:14 | replicating database |