Re: Re: Bug#108739: Tablenames should be compiled longer (fwd)
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Re: Bug#108739: Tablenames should be compiled longer (fwd) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 528.997911671@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Bug#108739: Tablenames should be compiled longer (fwd) ("Oliver Elphick" <olly@lfix.co.uk>) |
Ответы |
Re: Re: Bug#108739: Tablenames should be compiled longer
(fwd)
|
Список | pgsql-general |
"Oliver Elphick" <olly@lfix.co.uk> writes: > Would anyone like to comment on the advisability or otherwise of > my complying with this request? I think it's a lousy idea. (a) It's not at all clear to me that it's safe to compile clients with a different NAMEDATALEN from the server. Even if it happens to be okay with today's sources, the odds of such a lashup breaking in future are high. (b) Which NAMEDATALEN are you going to put in your shipped postgres_ext.h? Either answer is wrong, since people might try to use it to compile either frontend or backend code. (c) I have a very low tolerance for the notion that it's okay for the Debian distribution to differ however it pleases from what everyone else ships. That creates support problems for *us*, and so we have a right to object. We do have a TODO item to consider raising the standard NAMEDATALEN value. So far no one's done any legwork to try to measure space/speed penalties of larger lengths. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: