Brook Milligan wrote:
> See my other reply about what gets added: the problem is the rewrite
> rule name, as you guessed.
> Here's a patch that silently truncates the generated rule name.
What are the consequences of changing the NAMEDATALEN and recompiling?
Doesn't that seem like a better solution then to truncate the view name?
You can hit reply if you want "malcontent" is a legit email.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Zeugswetter Andreas SB||Date: 2000-08-24 08:29:50|
|Subject: AW: Re: How Do You Pronounce "PostgreSQL"?|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2000-08-24 04:54:36|
|Subject: Some gripes about BugTool|
pgsql-patches by date
|Next:||From: Christopher Cain||Date: 2000-08-24 19:30:14|
|Subject: JDBC Patch|
|Previous:||From: Ross J. Reedstrom||Date: 2000-08-23 17:55:18|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] when does CREATE VIEW not create a view?|