Re: Truncation of object names
Joel Burton <jburton@scw.org>
From: Joel Burton <jburton@scw.org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2001-04-13T21:08:46Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Fri, 13 Apr 2001, Tom Lane wrote: > Obviously, these objections are not strong enough to keep us from > increasing the standard value of NAMEDATALEN if it seems that many > people are running into the limit. But AFAICT relatively few people > have such problems, and I'm hesitant to make everyone deal with a change > for the benefit of a few. Count me as a weak vote for leaving it where > it is ... Hmm... Of course, it's Bad to break things if one doesn't have to. But (IMHO) its also bad to leave it at a setting that makes some group of people (~ 3%?) have to recompile it, and a larger group (~ 10%) wish they did/knew how to. (I, in general, share your hesistancy to break something for the benefit of the few, 'cept I'm one of the few this time. ;-) ) For some changes, one could just prewarn the world that This Is Coming, and they should anticipate it with 6 months notice or such. In this case, though, it would seem that knowing it was coming wouldn't help any -- you'd still have to recompile your client for the 32char names and the 64 (?) char names, during the 7.1 -> 7.2 (or 7.5 -> 8.0 or whatever) transition period. I'd like to see it longer -- is there any sane way of doing this with notice, or, as I fear, would it always be a pain, regardless of how much advance notice the world rec'd? Thanks, -- Joel Burton <jburton@scw.org> Director of Information Systems, Support Center of Washington