Thread: Allowing for longer table names (>64 characters)

Allowing for longer table names (>64 characters)

From
Allan Kamau
Date:
Hi all,
I would like to increase the database objects names limit from 64
characters to may be 128 characters to avoid name conflicts after
truncation of long table/sequence names.
I have seen a solution to this sometime back which includes (building
from source) modifying a header file then recompiling, but I now
cannot find this information.

Allan.

Re: Allowing for longer table names (>64 characters)

From
"A. Kretschmer"
Date:
In response to Allan Kamau :
> Hi all,
> I would like to increase the database objects names limit from 64
> characters to may be 128 characters to avoid name conflicts after
> truncation of long table/sequence names.
> I have seen a solution to this sometime back which includes (building
> from source) modifying a header file then recompiling, but I now
> cannot find this information.

In the source-tree, src/include/pg_config_manual.h , change NAMEDATALEN.
But i think it's a bad idea ... 64 characters are enough for me.


Andreas
--
Andreas Kretschmer
Kontakt:  Heynitz: 035242/47150,   D1: 0160/7141639 (mehr: -> Header)
GnuPG: 0x31720C99, 1006 CCB4 A326 1D42 6431  2EB0 389D 1DC2 3172 0C99

Re: Allowing for longer table names (>64 characters)

From
Allan Kamau
Date:
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 11:21 AM, A. Kretschmer
<andreas.kretschmer@schollglas.com> wrote:
> In response to Allan Kamau :
>> Hi all,
>> I would like to increase the database objects names limit from 64
>> characters to may be 128 characters to avoid name conflicts after
>> truncation of long table/sequence names.
>> I have seen a solution to this sometime back which includes (building
>> from source) modifying a header file then recompiling, but I now
>> cannot find this information.
>
> In the source-tree, src/include/pg_config_manual.h , change NAMEDATALEN.
> But i think it's a bad idea ... 64 characters are enough for me.
>
>
> Andreas
> --
> Andreas Kretschmer
> Kontakt:  Heynitz: 035242/47150,   D1: 0160/7141639 (mehr: -> Header)
> GnuPG: 0x31720C99, 1006 CCB4 A326 1D42 6431  2EB0 389D 1DC2 3172 0C99
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
>

Thanks Andreas, I too agree it may not be a good idea to have long for
various reasons including porting/upgrading issues and so on, as I
have many tables, I seem to have been caught up in describing table
functionality in the table name :-)

Allan.

Re: Allowing for longer table names (>64 characters)

From
"A. Kretschmer"
Date:
In response to Allan Kamau :
> Thanks Andreas, I too agree it may not be a good idea to have long for
> various reasons including porting/upgrading issues and so on, as I
> have many tables, I seem to have been caught up in describing table
> functionality in the table name :-)

The table-name is the wrong place for comments, use

comment on table foo is 'my comment';

instead.


Andreas
--
Andreas Kretschmer
Kontakt:  Heynitz: 035242/47150,   D1: 0160/7141639 (mehr: -> Header)
GnuPG: 0x31720C99, 1006 CCB4 A326 1D42 6431  2EB0 389D 1DC2 3172 0C99

Re: Allowing for longer table names (>64 characters)

From
Tino Wildenhain
Date:
Hi Allan,

Am 20.11.2009 10:42, schrieb Allan Kamau:
...
>
> Thanks Andreas, I too agree it may not be a good idea to have long for
> various reasons including porting/upgrading issues and so on, as I
> have many tables, I seem to have been caught up in describing table
> functionality in the table name :-)

As Andreas said, comment is perhaps a better place for descriptions.

Also did you thought of using schema as additional grouping system to
avoid having many overly descriptive table names?

Regards
Tino


Attachment

Re: Allowing for longer table names (>64 characters)

From
"Bret"
Date:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org
> [mailto:pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Allan Kamau
> Sent: Friday, November 20, 2009 1:42 AM
> To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Allowing for longer table names (>64
> characters)
>
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 11:21 AM, A. Kretschmer
> <andreas.kretschmer@schollglas.com> wrote:
> > In response to Allan Kamau :
> >> Hi all,
> >> I would like to increase the database objects names limit from 64
> >> characters to may be 128 characters to avoid name conflicts after
> >> truncation of long table/sequence names.
> >> I have seen a solution to this sometime back which
> includes (building
> >> from source) modifying a header file then recompiling, but I now
> >> cannot find this information.
> >
> > In the source-tree, src/include/pg_config_manual.h , change
> NAMEDATALEN.
> > But i think it's a bad idea ... 64 characters are enough for me.
> >
> >
> > Andreas
> > --
> > Andreas Kretschmer
> > Kontakt: �Heynitz: 035242/47150, � D1: 0160/7141639 (mehr:
> -> Header)
> > GnuPG: 0x31720C99, 1006 CCB4 A326 1D42 6431 �2EB0 389D 1DC2
> 3172 0C99
> >
> > --
> > Sent via pgsql-general mailing list
> (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To
> > make changes to your subscription:
> > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
> >
>
> Thanks Andreas, I too agree it may not be a good idea to have
> long for various reasons including porting/upgrading issues
> and so on, as I have many tables, I seem to have been caught
> up in describing table functionality in the table name :-)
>
> Allan.
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-general mailing list
> (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general




I can't imagine naming a table like you describe. A "users" table
name is pretty clear.

I would love to see an example of this. You should probably
get "un-caught-up" in using this concept. Perhaps reading about
an existing model (ie; hungarian notation) and tweak it to fit
your needs.

But hey..maybe you're on to a new thing.

Bret