Re: Name limitation question
От | greg@turnstep.com |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Name limitation question |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 8bd9a4ea6e00755430f1664ab553a0ea@biglumber.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Name limitation question (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Name limitation question
|
Список | pgsql-novice |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 > > Isn't the SQL standard 128 chars? > > Yes. We tested that a few months ago when we raised the limit from 31 > to 63, and determined that there was a nontrivial additional speed and > space penalty to raising it to 128. Since nobody could muster a > real-world use case that actually required 128, we didn't go there. > But if you feel you need to check off that particular SQL-compliance > box, see NAMEDATALEN in postgres_ext.h. Would it make more sense to put this in as a configure option? It might be rarely changed, but it does seem like the right place for it. - -- Greg Sabino Mullane greg@turnstep.com PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 200306251101 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: http://www.turnstep.com/pgp.html iD8DBQE++b0LvJuQZxSWSsgRAiMxAKD3GEYVETU++nq6ye4iR8MEsmUBpgCfRngF CW1ypGDmDFUsGCEkaTd6+PU= =bmFP -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
В списке pgsql-novice по дате отправления: