Re: SQL/DDL Limitations (and DB2)

[Satheesh Bandaram]

I did some searching on the internet. I found this table about some of the DDL maximum lenghts. (Haven't verified) If Derby increases constraint name length to 128, looks like it would break application migration to both Oracle and DB2, the top two enterprise databases. While increasing the limit makes life easier to migrate applications to Derby, wouldn't it make it harder to migrate out of Derby to enterprise databases? Being a free Apache product, Derby might actually have to pay attention to both migration routes ... Satheesh Identifier maximum length (characters) Oracle 9 DB2 8.1 SQL Server 2000 Table name length 30 128 128 Column name length 30 30 128 Constraint name length 30 18 128 Index name length 30 128 128 Number of table columns 1000 255 1023 Jason Rimmer wrote:     While a reasonable suggestion on its face adoption puts Derby on a slippery slope.  Why favor DB2?  Why not add transition flags for any 'enterprise-class' database such as P determine a destiny of its own. (Though I understand that such a determination could lead to the maintenance of these DB2 compatibility flags).   Joel Rosi-Schwartz wrote: I am just guessing that IBM would be less than overjoyed if Derby lost its ability to be an easy migration path to DB2. Would it not be fairly reasonable, however, to fulfil both requirements. At database creation time a flag could be set to dictate DB2 mode or extended mode. The database could then set an immutable database level property and behave accordingly. True this would introduce some complexity into the system, but it would be politically sensitive while still achieving better functionality. - joel