On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 4:13 PM David G. Johnston < david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 4:08 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >> Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.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.
