Re: [HACKERS] A notice for too long names

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] A notice for too long names
Date: 2000-01-20 21:54:42
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.21.0001201907190.349-100000@localhost.localdomain
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2000-01-20, Tom Lane mentioned:

> Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> writes:
> >> Wouldn't it be fair if a notice was generated if you attempt to create
> >> and/or reference a name that's longer than NAMEDATALEN.
>
> > Would it be better to throw an elog(ERROR)?
>
> Definitely NOT. Rejecting long identifiers went out with Dartmouth Basic.

But it came back with compilers issuing warnings (hence notice) about
them. Silently truncating input went out with GNU, so I guess it's more of
a current trend ... :)

--
Peter Eisentraut Sernanders väg 10:115
peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net 75262 Uppsala
http://yi.org/peter-e/ Sweden

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2000-01-20 21:54:56 Re: [HACKERS] COPY problems with psql / libpq
Previous Message clyde jones 2000-01-20 21:29:31 how to for postgres as website backend