On Mon, 15 Apr 2002 23:34:04 -0400 "Alvaro Herrera" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > En Mon, 15 Apr 2002 23:19:45 -0400 > "Rod Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió: > > > 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 ;) > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2002-01/msg00939.php > > (Tom Lane says both SQL92 and SQL99 specify 128 as the maximun > identifier length) > > Anyway, how does one measure the perfomance impact of such a change? > By merely changing the constant definition, or also by actually using > long identifiers?
Name values are stored NULL-padded up to NAMEDATALEN bytes, so there is no need to actually use long identifiers, just change the value of NAMEDATALEN, recompile and run some benchmarks (perhaps OSDB? http://osdb.sf.net). If you do decide to run some benchmarks (and some more data would be good), please use the current CVS code. I sent in a patch a little while ago that should somewhat reduce the penalty for increasing NAMEDATALEN. Cheers, Neil -- Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster