> >>I think the question should be "Do we go for full SQL2003 compliance?"
> >>and make thinks that are currently limited to 31 characters move to the
> >>64 character limit defined there.
> >
> > I don't about 64 characters, I just read the SQL Standard document
> > that I have and it's 128 characters. And, yes, I know it's too late
> > for FB2, but if Jim wants to do that in Vulcan, he has my support.
> > Otherwise, let's try to put it in FB 3. I hit the limit when I try to
> > use a more descriptive name for a table or a field, because
> > abbreviations do tend to resemble each other after 250 tables.
>
> I keep hitting the 31 character limit when porting. Not so much with the
> field names, but with the Index or generator names that take the field
> names and add a few characters :(

On the other hand ... Oracle developers have been living with
30-character object names limits for years now ..


() :-)

With regards,

Martijn Tonies
Database Workbench - tool for InterBase, Firebird, MySQL, Oracle & MS SQL
Server
Upscene Productions
http://www.upscene.com
Database development questions? Check the forum!
http://www.databasedevelopmentforum.com