Re: export FUNC_MAX_ARGS as a read-only GUC variable

Joe Conway wrote:
> >>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.
>
> Agreed. Now:
> name | max_function_args
> name | max_identifier_length
> name | max_index_keys

Nice.

> >>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?
>
> Well the configure option is:
> --enable-integer-datetimes
> so "integer_datetimes" seemed natural to me.
>
> The description is a statement because the option is boolean, i.e. the
> statement "Datetimes are integer based" is either "true" or "false"
> ("on" or "off", etc). How stongly do you feel about it? I don't think
> "integer_datetime_storage" is accurate in any case.

Not strongly. Keep it unchanged.

--
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