Re: Question about the NAME type used in pg_proc and pg_class

On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 12:53:25PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> regression=# select 1 *********************************************************************************** 2;
> server closed the connection unexpectedly
>
> with this in the log:
> TRAP: FailedAssertion("!(keylen < 64)", File: "hashfunc.c", Line: 129)
>
> I believe that there would be no real ill effect in a non-assertion
> build, it would just say it couldn't find the operator.  Too lazy to
> recompile that way to find out though.

Confirmed.  The following is from REL8_0_STABLE built without assertions:

test=> select 1 *********************************************************************************** 2;
ERROR:  operator does not exist: integer
***********************************************************************************integer 
HINT:  No operator matches the given name and argument type(s). You may need to add explicit type casts.

> I kinda think that truncation isn't a real sensible way to deal with
> overly long operator names anyway, and that throwing an ERROR would be
> more reasonable; if the scanner thinks it is looking at an 80-character
> operator name, you've probably messed up the syntax somewhere along the
> line.  Comments?

An error sounds reasonable to me.

--
Michael Fuhr