Re: BUG #18711: Attempting a connection with a database name longer than 63 characters now fails - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Nathan Bossart
Subject Re: BUG #18711: Attempting a connection with a database name longer than 63 characters now fails
Date
Msg-id Z1n9I4MBers-si82@nathan
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: BUG #18711: Attempting a connection with a database name longer than 63 characters now fails  (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: BUG #18711: Attempting a connection with a database name longer than 63 characters now fails
Re: BUG #18711: Attempting a connection with a database name longer than 63 characters now fails
List pgsql-bugs
On Tue, Dec 03, 2024 at 09:03:55PM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 3, 2024 at 8:38 PM Bertrand Drouvot
> <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Maybe we can try an "hybrid" approach that could simplify the AlterSystemCatalogEncoding()
>> by relying on a new struct, say:
> 
> Interesting idea, yeah, I'll look into that.
> 
>> Do you think it's worth to move the discussion into a dedicated hackers thread?
>> (maybe reaching a wider audience?) I think the subject is sensible enough.
> 
> Ok yeah, I'll start a new thread on -hackers soon.

If we are leaning towards a more comprehensive fix in v18, ISTM we should
go ahead and revert commit 562bee0 (both for master and v17).  Or am I
misinterpreting the proposed path forward here?

-- 
nathan



pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: TimestampTz->Text->TimestampTz casting fails with DateStyle 'Postgres'
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #18711: Attempting a connection with a database name longer than 63 characters now fails