From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Bill McGonigle <mcgonigle(at)medicalmedia(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: trouble with the automatic indexes on CREATE TABLE |
Date: | 2001-05-16 15:00:06 |
Message-ID: | 17324.990025206@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Bill McGonigle <mcgonigle(at)medicalmedia(dot)com> writes:
> There is one discussion of NAMEDATALEN in the archives, pertaining to
> version 6.4.2. That discussion brings up a few questions/assumptions
> related to getting this to work reliably. I'd love to hear any
> comments/corrections/amplifications:
> 1) It was required that OIDNAMELEN be set to sizeof(Oid) + NAMEDATALEN.
OIDNAMELEN is long gone. You don't have to change anything except
NAMEDATALEN.
> 3) Will psql from another machine fail to work if that machine's pgsql
> hasn't been compiled with the modified MAXDATALEN? Is this the same
> question as (2)?
The reason NAMEDATALEN is in postgres_ext.h is that it's visible to (and
used by) clients as well as the backend. So yes, you'd better recompile
everything. I am not sure what problems you would have with mismatched
clients. If you're lucky, they'll merely truncate your longer names,
and not coredump ...
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Vivek Khera | 2001-05-16 15:14:04 | optimal newfs for postgres data store |
Previous Message | Bill McGonigle | 2001-05-16 14:49:12 | Re: trouble with the automatic indexes on CREATE TABLE |