> >>Almost nothing changes except the max length of table names and the name
> >>matching rules in the BLR and SQL compilers.
> >>
> >>It seems too simple. What am I missing?
> >
> >
> > Quoted identifiers.
> >
> > "hungry.wolf" and "hungry"."wolf" will become undistinguishable.
>
> And so they must to be compatible with other databases. The only
> 'problem' I see is that hungry."wolf" becomes HUNGRY.wolf in Firebird
> but hungry.wolf elsewhere. Just something to keep an eye on as far as I
> am concerned, but I already have to watch it in all the PHP stuff!
>
> My only question is "Is VARCHAR(256) enough, would VARCHAR(512) cause
> any problems?" Then one can have large UNICODE names as well and we do
> not have to worry about another increase later?

I fail to see why VARCHAR(256) cannot be unicode in the first place?

It means/should mean characters, not bytes.

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