Horton

Re: BUG #18711: Attempting a connection with a database name longer than 63 characters now fails

Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
To: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, adam@labkey.com, pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Date: 2024-11-27T16:50:18Z
Lists: pgsql-bugs 
On Wed, Nov 27, 2024 at 04:36:07PM +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> I'd vote for "leave it alone" or wait to see if we get more reports before
> deciding.

Did your initial report originate from users or from just exploring the
code?  If it's the latter, then AFAICT this thread is really the only
feedback from the field we have to go on, and IMHO it'd be better to
proceed with reverting.  But if you were fielding complaints from users,
then perhaps there is more room for discussion.

-- 
nathan

Commits

  1. Revert "Don't truncate database and user names in startup packets."

  2. Don't truncate database and user names in startup packets.

  3. Truncate incoming username and database name to NAMEDATALEN-1 characters