From: | David Johnston <polobo(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>, "pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] Prepared Statement Name Truncation |
Date: | 2012-11-18 14:10:23 |
Message-ID: | 20152C83-CD88-4725-A790-0B32305751AE@yahoo.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-general |
On Nov 18, 2012, at 2:24, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> "Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com> writes:
>>> If it's a postgres bug, what is the fix? Make the identifier max size
>>> longer?
>
>> I'd also be in favor of this, in addition to upgrading from a NOTICE.
>
> On the whole I'm not too excited about changing this.
>
Then I'd agree with the OP and think the notice should go away on usage in DML; though it should be kept for DDL.
Can the system be made smart enough to not allow intra-schema collisions in addition to same schema ones? That would seem to be the area of greatest concern - particularly around the usage of truncate/delete/drop.
Thought: would there be some way to flag a table like this to always require the use of a schema prefix to be accessed (since right now truncated names only have to be schema unique) in certain conditions (drop, delete, truncate)?
David J.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2012-11-18 16:28:53 | Re: BUG #7670: BUG #7545: Unresponsive server with error log reporting: "poll() failed: Invalid argument" |
Previous Message | Jacek Domagalski | 2012-11-18 13:20:55 | Re: BUG #7667: Segmentation fault |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Vick Khera | 2012-11-18 16:57:52 | Re: Difference between varchar and text? |
Previous Message | Craig Ringer | 2012-11-18 12:34:46 | Re: Parser - Query Analyser |