| From: | "Rod Taylor" <rbt(at)zort(dot)ca> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Hackers List" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCHES] [SQL] 16 parameter limit |
| Date: | 2002-04-16 03:19:45 |
| Message-ID: | 0a9401c1e4f5$8f2ac5b0$8001a8c0@jester |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches pgsql-sql |
On the note of NAMEDATALEN, a view in the INFORMATION_SCHEMA
definition is exactly 2 characters over the current limit.
ADMINISTRABLE_ROLE_AUTHORIZATIONS
Not that it's a great reason, but it isn't a bad one for increasing
the limit ;)
--
Rod Taylor
> Are we staying at 16 as the default? I personally think we can
> increase it to 32 with little penalty, and that we should increase
> NAMEDATALEN to 64.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-04-16 03:21:03 | Re: ANSI Compliant Inserts |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-04-16 03:18:52 | Re: [SQL] 16 parameter limit |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-04-16 03:21:03 | Re: ANSI Compliant Inserts |
| Previous Message | Hiroshi Inoue | 2002-04-16 03:18:16 | Re: ANSI Compliant Inserts |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2002-04-16 03:25:20 | Re: [SQL] 16 parameter limit |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-04-16 02:58:51 | Re: [SQL] 16 parameter limit |