Tom Lane wrote: > > NAMEDATALEN - disk/performance penalty for increase, 64, 128? > > FUNC_MAX_ARGS - disk/performance penalty for increase, 24, 32? > > At the moment I don't see a lot of solid evidence that increasing > NAMEDATALEN has any performance penalty. Someone reported about > a 10% slowdown on pgbench with NAMEDATALEN=128 ... but Neil Conway > tried to reproduce the result, and got about a 10% *speedup*. > Personally I think 10% is well within the noise spectrum for > pgbench, and so it's difficult to claim that we have established > any performance difference at all. I have not tried to measure > FUNC_MAX_ARGS differences.
Yes, we need someone to benchmark both the NAMEDATALEN and FUNC_MAX_ARGS to prove we are not causing performance problems. Once that is done, the default limits can be easily increased. I was thinking 64 for NAMEDATALEN and 32 for FUNC_MAX_ARGS, effectively doubling both. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 853-3000 + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
