Call me thick as two planks, but when you guys constantly refer to 'schema
support' in PostgreSQL, what exactly are you referring to?
Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org]On Behalf Of Tom Lane
Sent: Saturday, 14 April 2001 5:46 AM
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Truncation of object names
ncm@zembu.com (Nathan Myers) writes:
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2001 at 04:27:15PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Have you thought about simply increasing NAMEDATALEN in your
>> installation? If you really are generating names that aren't unique
>> in 31 characters, that seems like the way to go ...
> We discussed that, and will probably do it (too).
> One problem is that, having translated "foo.bar.baz" to "foo_bar_baz",
> you have a problem when you encounter "foo.bar_baz" in subsequent code.
So it's not really so much that NAMEDATALEN is too short for your
individual names, it's that you are concatenating names as a workaround
for the lack of schema support.
FWIW, I believe schemas are very high on the priority list for 7.2 ...
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
http://www.postgresql.org/search.mpl
