From: | Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | stuart(at)NOJUNK_ludwig(dot)ucl(dot)ac(dot)uk (Stuart Rison) |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] Length of field names. |
Date: | 1998-07-13 17:45:19 |
Message-ID: | 199807131745.NAA19947@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
> So my guess is that with the original name, malignant_pathologies_invasive
> and the primary key created by it (normally
> malignant_pathologies_invasive_pkey) end up having the same name because of
> the cut-off?
>
> Does this seem right? If so, what is the max length of field names and can
> anyone suggest a way around this problem (obviously I could just give the
> tables shorter names but they are computer generated by a Perl script and
> if at all possible, I'd like to keep the filed and table names in this long
> format).
max length is 31.
> PS. For those that have been following the \dt <regex> discussion, in this
> case I would have like a '\d \dt' kind of query to get PG to give me the
> type and length of the Field field (which is more of an SQL query type of
> question so probably would have required SQL access to catalog tables as
> Herouth suggested).
Huh? Doesn't \d \dt do that if you supply the table name?
--
Bruce Momjian | 830 Blythe Avenue
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
+ If your life is a hard drive, | (610) 353-9879(w)
+ Christ can be your backup. | (610) 853-3000(h)
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stuart Rison | 1998-07-13 18:02:07 | Re: [GENERAL] Length of field names. |
Previous Message | Stuart Rison | 1998-07-13 17:03:36 | [GENERAL] Length of field names. |