| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Aaron W(dot) Swenson" <titanofold(at)gentoo(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Mailing Lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Fix token exceeding NAMELEN |
| Date: | 2015-05-15 02:35:49 |
| Message-ID: | 1150.1431657349@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Aaron W. Swenson" <titanofold(at)gentoo(dot)org> writes:
> On 2015-05-13 18:16, Christopher Browne wrote:
>> I thought that this restriction was alleviated years ago, so I'm a bit
>> surprised to see this come up in 2015. (Or perhaps Gentoo hasn't
>> yet opened up some limits??? :-) )
> The restriction is alleviated (patched) by some distributions, and
> Gentoo isn't among those.
> It has been almost 4 years (the most recent Google has found) since the
> last time this happened with PostgreSQL's docs.
> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/BANLkTiktW6SRDygVfJRB4q+7dvWoQCC1Yg@mail.gmail.com
Ah, so we have hit it before and forgotten. Might as well stick to the
previous decision then. Patch applied, thanks!
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2015-05-15 04:41:38 | Re: upper planner path-ification |
| Previous Message | Amit Langote | 2015-05-15 02:11:47 | Re: BackendPidGetProc doesn't return PGPROC for background worker? |