No reason to have limitations in Derby based on DB2 limitations at this point.
Geoff Soutter (JIRA) wrote:
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-104?page=comments#action_57512 ]
Geoff Soutter commented on DERBY-104:
-------------------------------------
A couple of notes:
- we probably shouldn't rename DB2_ limits until the values have been changed to Derby specific values - otherwise it makes it even harder to figure out where the value came from.
- changing some of these limits may make the DatabaseMetadata provided by the IBM DB2 JDBC Driver incorrect when used in server mode (embedded mode is OK). Not sure what we can do about that considering we don't have the source.
Get rid of the Max lenght of 18 for constraint names ----------------------------------------------------
Key: DERBY-104 URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-104 Project: Derby Type: Wish Reporter: Bernd Ruehlicke Priority: Minor Attachments: derby-id-plus-renames-v2.patch
If not unlimited than we should at least make them 80 (just to pick a abitrary number)
-- Lance Andersen email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Microsystems Inc. phone: (781) 442-2037 1 Network Drive, UBUR02-301 fax : (781) 442-1610 Burlington, MA 01803
