Re: Access to Postgresql Utility
От | caldodge@fpcc.net (Calvin Dodge) |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Access to Postgresql Utility |
Дата | |
Msg-id | ca6275f0.0201011515.6a8f03ea@posting.google.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Access to Postgresql Utility (David Bryan <d_bryan_remove@onebox.com>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
David Bryan <d_bryan_remove@onebox.com> wrote in message news:<I4mY7.1086$tu1.420591758@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>... > I am currently working on a MS Access to PostgreSQL utility. Since I could > not find one I suppose I will either release it to the PostgreSQL folks or > put it out as open source. You might try http://sevainc.com/access/. There's an Access-based converter there which does a reasonable job of converting Access to PostgreSQL (providing there are no "funny" characters in the table, field, or index names. > What I am tring to discover is the maximum length table, field, index names > can be. I want to make sure that I correct any problems during the SQL code > generation. Generally, the length limit on names is 31 characters. That can be changed at compile time - which means it would be the default limit for those users (including me) who simply install it from the binary package (rpm, deb) of their choice. > The idea is to make it easier to port Access applications to PostgreSQL > rather than SQL Server. A worthy goal, to be sure. One "gotcha" to watch out for - PostgreSQL allows indexes on "text" fields (unlimited-length strings), while Access does NOT do indexes on its equivalent (memo). Because of this, Access will choke if you try to create an ODBC link to a Postgres table with indexed text fields. (one workaround is to create a view which includes the table in question, since Access doesn't "see" indexes for tables in a view). Calvin
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: