Re: [Rails-core] Rev 3718 broke my Oracle

2006-03-18 Thread Corey Donohoe
3921 fixed the identifier too long problem. thanks dude. I get different results when I run all.sh than when I run a specific test, anyone have any idea why that might be? On 3/18/06, Rick Olson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 3/18/06, Corey Donohoe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > This sounds gre

Re: [Rails-core] Rev 3718 broke my Oracle

2006-03-18 Thread Rick Olson
On 3/18/06, Corey Donohoe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This sounds great from the oracle side, can test for ya whenever. I did it last night. Let me know how it works! I added column alias limits to the database adapters I knew about, and also reworked the way they're generated. I put the table

Re: [Rails-core] Rev 3718 broke my Oracle

2006-03-18 Thread Corey Donohoe
This sounds great from the oracle side, can test for ya whenever. On 3/17/06, Rick Olson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 3/16/06, John Sheets <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mar 16, 2006, at 1:38 PM, Steve Longdo wrote: > > > > > Older versions of DB2 suffer the same character length issue with

Re: [Rails-core] Rev 3718 broke my Oracle

2006-03-17 Thread Rick Olson
On 3/16/06, John Sheets <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mar 16, 2006, at 1:38 PM, Steve Longdo wrote: > > > Older versions of DB2 suffer the same character length issue with > > table names as an FYI. > > FYI, it looks like Sybase 12.5 is limited to 30 chars for both table > and column names. > > J

Re: [Rails-core] Rev 3718 broke my Oracle

2006-03-16 Thread John Sheets
On Mar 16, 2006, at 1:38 PM, Steve Longdo wrote: Older versions of DB2 suffer the same character length issue with table names as an FYI. FYI, it looks like Sybase 12.5 is limited to 30 chars for both table and column names. John -- John R. Sheets http://umberdog.com/ _

Re: [Rails-core] Rev 3718 broke my Oracle

2006-03-16 Thread Steve Longdo
DB2 version 7 and before limit for table/column/alias is 18 chars.  Version 8 forwards is 30 for column/alias and 128 for tablenames.  Not sure why IBM did it that way...On 3/16/06, Michael Schoen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Rick Olson wrote:> Should Oracle have a special aliasing method that conve

Re: [Rails-core] Rev 3718 broke my Oracle

2006-03-16 Thread Michael Schoen
Rick Olson wrote: Should Oracle have a special aliasing method that converts that to j_c_posts? Should all databases do that consistently? I'd really like to have readable aliases and get away from something like j_c_posts_2. Do other dbs have a length limit on aliases? Oracle's is 30 chars.

Re: [Rails-core] Rev 3718 broke my Oracle

2006-03-16 Thread Michael Schoen
Rick Olson wrote: Should Oracle have a special aliasing method that converts that to j_c_posts? Should all databases do that consistently? I'd really like to have readable aliases and get away from something like j_c_posts_2. Do other dbs have a length limit on aliases? Oracle's is 30 chars.

Re: [Rails-core] Rev 3718 broke my Oracle

2006-03-16 Thread Steve Longdo
Older versions of DB2 suffer the same character length issue with table names as an FYI.On 3/16/06, Rick Olson < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> Should AR pass all tests on oracle?  I'm on rev 3900 atm and I still get > four errors.>>> --> Corey Donohoe> http://www.atmos.org/> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Corey sh

Re: [Rails-core] Rev 3718 broke my Oracle

2006-03-16 Thread Rick Olson
> Should AR pass all tests on oracle? I'm on rev 3900 atm and I still get > four errors. > > > -- > Corey Donohoe > http://www.atmos.org/ > [EMAIL PROTECTED] Corey showed me the errors http://rafb.net/paste/results/5O41hK24.html (will self destruct in 24 hours. #1-3 look like fixture/constraint

Re: [Rails-core] Rev 3718 broke my Oracle

2006-03-16 Thread Corey Donohoe
On 3/14/06, Michael Schoen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Michael Schoen wrote:> Wilson Bilkovich wrote:>> Sorry to send another message like this, but..>> 3706 works, 3718 fails.>> Looks like the migration process is a little odd after that point. >> I'll take a look.Fixed as part ofhttp://dev

Re: [Rails-core] Rev 3718 broke my Oracle

2006-03-14 Thread Rick Olson
> Thanks again for your work on Oracle support. I get a lot of mileage out of > it. Sorry for the troubles, I'll be sure to submit my patches to this list before making widespread changes like that :) -- Rick Olson http://techno-weenie.net ___ Rails-c

Re: [Rails-core] Rev 3718 broke my Oracle

2006-03-14 Thread Wilson Bilkovich
On 3/14/06, Michael Schoen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Michael Schoen wrote: > > Wilson Bilkovich wrote: > >> Sorry to send another message like this, but.. > >> 3706 works, 3718 fails. > >> Looks like the migration process is a little odd after that point. > > > > I'll take a look. > > Fixed as p

Re: [Rails-core] Rev 3718 broke my Oracle

2006-03-14 Thread Michael Schoen
Michael Schoen wrote: Wilson Bilkovich wrote: Sorry to send another message like this, but.. 3706 works, 3718 fails. Looks like the migration process is a little odd after that point. I'll take a look. Fixed as part of http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/4230 ___

Re: [Rails-core] Rev 3718 broke my Oracle

2006-03-02 Thread Michael Schoen
Wilson Bilkovich wrote: Sorry to send another message like this, but.. 3706 works, 3718 fails. Looks like the migration process is a little odd after that point. I'll take a look. ___ Rails-core mailing list Rails-core@lists.rubyonrails.org http://li

[Rails-core] Rev 3718 broke my Oracle

2006-03-02 Thread Wilson Bilkovich
Sorry to send another message like this, but.. 3706 works, 3718 fails. Looks like the migration process is a little odd after that point. On 3718: C:\rails\spending_plan>rake test:units (in C:/rails/spending_plan) -- create_table("activity_codes", {:force=>true}) -> 0.2850s -- create_table("bud