Re: [GENERAL] Length of field names. - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Stuart Rison
Subject Re: [GENERAL] Length of field names.
Date
Msg-id l03110706b1cff972b391@[128.40.242.190]
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [GENERAL] Length of field names.  (Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [GENERAL] Length of field names.  (Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-general
>> So my guess is that with the original name, malignant_pathologies_invasive
>> and the primary key created by it (normally
>> malignant_pathologies_invasive_pkey) end up having the same name because of
>> the cut-off?
>>
>> Does this seem right?  If so, what is the max length of field names and can
>> anyone suggest a way around this problem (obviously I could just give the
>> tables shorter names but they are computer generated by a Perl script and
>> if at all possible, I'd like to keep the filed and table names in this long
>> format).
>
>max length is 31.
>
>> PS.  For those that have been following the \dt <regex> discussion, in this
>> case I would have like a '\d \dt' kind of query to get PG to give me the
>> type and length of the Field field (which is more of an SQL query type of
>> question so probably would have required SQL access to catalog tables as
>> Herouth suggested).
>
>Huh?  Doesn't \d \dt do that if you supply the table name?

Yeah I guess I didn't explain that very well.  Suppose you did

\d test

you'd get

    Field | Type   |  Length
------------------------------
 blah     | text   | var
 number   | int2   | 2
 code     | char() | 15

[hand-made table :)]

now what is was -badly- trying to say was that is you did a \d of that
table you'd get:


    Field  | Type      |  Length
-----------------------------------
    Field  | varchar() | 31
    Type   | varchar() | 10
    Length | int2      | 2

[or something like that, I'm guessing the numbers/types]

so a sort of \d on a \d which would have given me the max length of field.
If I understood Herouth's mail properly, all this information (i.e. catalog
table) are store as 'hidden' tables in the DBMS.  In Oracle it appears
these are actually 'usable' in SQL statements -if you know their names and
he was suggesting that the same could be of postgreSQL (I'm sorry if I got
that all wrong Herouth).

cheers,

Stuart.

PS.  That leaves me with giving tables and fields smaller names... I
suppose names of over 31 are pretty silly anyway... no wonder I keep
exceeding the query buffer!!




+-------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Stuart Rison            | Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research |
| Tel. (0171) 878 4041    | Courtauld Building                   |
| Fax. (0171) 878 4040    | 91 Riding House Street               |
+-------------------------+ London, W1P 8BT                      |
| stuart@ludwig.ucl.ac.uk | UNITED KINGDOM.                      |
+-------------------------+--------------------------------------+



pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Length of field names.
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Length of field names.