db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From dag.wan...@oracle.com (Dag H. Wanvik)
Subject Re: Database name length
Date Mon, 13 Sep 2010 13:46:44 GMT
Knut Anders Hatlen <knut.hatlen@oracle.com> writes:

> As to the possibility for a discrepancy between the maximum length in
> client mode and embedded mode, I think we already have such a
> discrepancy. The file system limit that prevents use of more than 255
> characters in a database name in embedded mode, applies to each
> component of the path name. The total length of the path in the URL may
> exceed 255 characters if none of the directory names in the path exceed
> 255 characters.
>
> The 255 characters limit in the network client, on the other hand,
> applies to the entire path in the URL, not to each component of the
> path. Also, the network client will take any connection attributes (like
> create=true) as part of the database name, whereas the embedded driver
> will not. Increasing the maximum length accepted by the network client
> should make it less likely that someone gets bitten by this difference
> between the drivers.

I think this issue plus the new one that Tiago has encountered with
varying byte lengths of UTF-8 encoded characters is a pretty strong
argument for being pragmatic here, in the interest of user
friendliness. We have two opposing principles at play here: a) Follow
the standards, and b) make client and embedded behave as identically as
possible.

Since the DB2 client driver no longer supports Derby, I would vote for
relaxing the 255 byte length restriction in the protocol.

Dag

Mime
View raw message