Re: Is there a drawback when changing NAMEDATALEN to 64?

From: "Gregory Wood" <gregw(at)com-stock(dot)com>
To: "PostgreSQL-General" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Is there a drawback when changing NAMEDATALEN to 64?
Date: 2002-01-11 20:43:41
Message-ID: 007f01c19ae0$a95c8810$7889ffcc@comstock.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

> BTW, there is at least a small potential for breaking applications with
> this change: NAMEDATALEN is part of the exported libpq ABI, because it
> affects the representation of PGnotify structures. When and if we do
> change the standard setting, I'm inclined to reverse the order of the
> fields in PGnotify, so that accesses to be_pid don't depend on
> NAMEDATALEN.

Would this also not break the method used to create SERIAL sequence names? I
know that I would have to fix a method I've written to calculate the
sequence name for a SERIAL field, and I suspect a few others have as well.
I'd be more than happy to fix it for a longer name though...

Greg

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message will trillich 2002-01-11 21:30:13 Re: caching subtotals: update vs sum -- aaugh!
Previous Message Jeffery Boes 2002-01-11 19:49:12 Temporarily disable rules?