Re: BUG #18711: Attempting a connection with a database name longer than 63 characters now fails
| От | Bertrand Drouvot | 
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: BUG #18711: Attempting a connection with a database name longer than 63 characters now fails | 
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | Zz4H/gOhZsctcJiF@ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal обсуждение исходный текст  | 
		
| Ответ на | Re: BUG #18711: Attempting a connection with a database name longer than 63 characters now fails (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) | 
| Список | pgsql-bugs | 
On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 10:39:35AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> writes: > > On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 03:20:45PM +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote: > >> I had in mind to "fully scan" pg_database in GetDatabaseTuple(), get the datname > >> and encoding from FormData_pg_database and start from there the comparison > >> with the dbname passed as an argument to GetDatabaseTuple(). Thoughts? > > > I was wondering if we could use the database encoding to disambiguate if we > > found multiple matches, but IIUC the identifier will be truncated using the > > encoding of the database from which it was created. > > Yeah, you can't really assume that a database's name is stored using > the encoding of that database. Yeah, good point, let's stick to the MAX_MULTIBYTE_CHAR_LEN idea then and discard the usage of pg_encoding_max_length(). Regards, -- Bertrand Drouvot PostgreSQL Contributors Team RDS Open Source Databases Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: