Re: [DISCUSS] length restrictions in 4.0

[Joan Touzet]

I presume the workaround would be "Replicate back to CouchDB 3.x, but 
truncate to 236 characters in the process?" You'd lose fidelity in the 
db name that way.

-Joan
On 2020-05-12 4:05 p.m., Robert Newson wrote:
I still don’t understand how the internal shard database name format has any 
bearing on our public interface, present or future.