On 18/11/12 17:10, Phil Sorber wrote:
On Nov 17, 2012 11:06 PM, "Gavin Flower"
<gavinflo...@archidevsys.co.nz <mailto:gavinflo...@archidevsys.co.nz>>
wrote:
>
> On 18/11/12 16:49, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
>>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: RIPEMD160
>>
>>
>>> NOTICE: identifier
>>> "this_is_a_really_long_identifier_for_a_prepared_statement_name_ok"
>>> will be truncated to
>>> "this_is_a_really_long_identifier_for_a_prepared_statement_name_"
>>> PREPARE
>>
>> ...
>>>
>>> The ORM could use a shorter identifier, but it supports multiple
backends
>>> and this is probably not something in their test suite. In addition it
>>> actually works!
>>
>> For now. If it really works, then by definition it does not /need/ to
>> be that long, as the truncated version is not blowing things up.
[...]
>>> Set a hard limit and ERROR instead of truncating and NOTICE?
>>> Both? Neither because that would break backward compatibility?
>>
>> My vote is WARNING and bump limit to 128 in 9.3. That's the combo most
>> likely to make dumb applications work better while not breaking
>> existing smart ones.
>>
>>
[...]
> Would it be appropriate to make it a WARNING in 9.2.2, then increase
the length in 9.3?
>
> Though I still feel I'd like it to be an ERROR, may be a
configuration variable in 9.3 to promote it to an ERROR with WARNING
being the default?
>
In that case I'd make it ERROR by default and make people override to
WARNING if it breaks things. Otherwise no one will change.
[...]
How about a WARNING in 9.2.2, and ERROR in 9.3 with a configuration
option to downgrade it to WARNING - as well as increasing the max length
to 128 to match the standard in 9.3 (I assume the size increase is to
drastic for 9.2.x!)?
Cheers,
Gavin