| From: | Ron Johnson <ron(dot)l(dot)johnson(at)cox(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | PgSQL General ML <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Table name lengths... |
| Date: | 2003-09-02 20:57:43 |
| Message-ID: | 1062536263.7342.244.camel@haggis |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Tue, 2003-09-02 at 12:47, Tom Lane wrote:
> Ron Johnson <ron(dot)l(dot)johnson(at)cox(dot)net> writes:
> > No matter how long PostgreSQL lets you make table names, I'd stick
> > with ANSI standard 31 characters.
>
> "ANSI standard"? SQL92 specifies that names can be up to 128 characters
> long. Perhaps there was a shorter limit in SQL89, but that ranks as
> ancient history now.
>
> (In fact, I just now realized that it says *characters*, not *bytes*,
> which means that in a multibyte encoding you could need quite a bit more
> than 128 bytes to meet the spec's requirement...)
Ok, color me erroneous. The 31 octet length is on Rdb/VMS, and was
picked because that's how long VMS file names were/are. Also, Oracle
has an object limit of 30 characters.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ron Johnson, Jr. ron(dot)l(dot)johnson(at)cox(dot)net
Jefferson, LA USA
Regarding war zones: "There's nothing sacrosanct about a hotel
with a bunch of journalists in it."
Marine Lt. Gen. Bernard E. Trainor (Retired)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | John Harrold | 2003-09-02 21:00:45 | setting last_value of sequence |
| Previous Message | Aurangzeb M. Agha | 2003-09-02 20:51:36 | Restarting, ownership, and permissions |