At 11:16 AM 13/12/2007, you wrote:

>> Unfortunately, that is not going to work. I agree it is an annoying
>> limitation, but not too many others seem to think so.
>
>I don't know where you got that impression... This is a limitation
>which affects many people.

That's true, though it's not really a limitation of significance technically. It's more in the nature of being a practical limitation to those migrating databases from more "tolerant" systems - usually just one of a number of compatibility issues that have to be considered for a migration.

>The fact that the issue has not been addressed, yet, is more a
>reflection of the poor state of the original engine code, which made any
>attempt to change the size equivalent to cutting your own wrists.

To construe it as a reflection of the "poor state of the original code" is misleading. Firebird inherited a system that started its life on hardware and OS's with extreme resource constraints by comparison with today's platforms. The 31-byte limit on identifiers was a totally justifiable in 1984...so if it's a reflection of anything, it is of the stable design precepts of the original code.

>Not everything can be fixed at once.

Ease of migration from wacky desktop systems and wacky non-desktop systems is a desirable objective. Being able to name a field "Grandmother's Favourite Recipe for Christmas Cake" has some appeal for spreadsheet enthusiasts; it's debatable whether it's particularly high in the priorities for improving the stability and performance of databases...

./heLen