Re: Is there a drawback when changing NAMEDATALEN to 64?
От | Bill McGonigle |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Is there a drawback when changing NAMEDATALEN to 64? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20C2A74E-2B10-11D6-B91E-003065EAE3C0@medicalmedia.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Is there a drawback when changing NAMEDATALEN to 64? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Is there a drawback when changing NAMEDATALEN to 64?
|
Список | pgsql-general |
On Thursday, January 24, 2002, at 06:53 , Tom Lane wrote: > BTW, I noticed the other day that both SQL92 and SQL99 specify the > maximum identifier length as 128. So really there is a standardization > argument for pushing it up to 128 ... Yeah, I realize this was a month ago. :) One question: What is an identifier defined as? The reason I'm being pendantic is that I've run into trouble not with any particular table or column name being > 32, but the automated key name generated for tables with a NOT NULL UNIQUE column is table_column_key, which easily busts the limit. The reason I ask is because if an identifier is only defined as something like a column name or table name, then NAMEDATALEN would have to be 128+128+5, if I did the math right. BTW, I keep my patch for configuring it in 7.1 at: http://www.zettabyte.net/downloads/postgres/namedatalen-patch/ in case anyone needs it. -Bill
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: