[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-4805?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13854587#comment-13854587
]
Mamta A. Satoor commented on DERBY-4805:
----------------------------------------
I need to hand test various version combination of client and server but I
think following combinations should work as follows for RDBNAM longer than 255
bytes. Please let me know if I have missed any combinations or behavior below
should be different.
1)Client and Server at 10.11 and higher will now allow RDBNAM longer than 255.
2)Client at 10.10 or below talking to Server at 10.11 will get length too big
exception.
3)Client at 10.11 or higher talking to Server at 10.10 or lower will get length
too big exception
> Increase the length of the RDBNAM field in the DRDA implementation
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-4805
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-4805
> Project: Derby
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Network Client, Network Server
> Affects Versions: 10.7.1.1
> Reporter: Tiago R. Espinha
> Assignee: Mamta A. Satoor
> Labels: derby_triage10_9
> Attachments: DERBY_4805_diff_patch1.txt
>
>
> Currently, whenever the client driver is used, there is a limit of 255 bytes
> for the database name. This is defined by the DRDA spec and there has been a
> discussion on the list [1]/[2] as to whether this limit should be raised due
> to the introduction of the new ACR that allows for UTF-8 characters.
> UTF-8 characters can take up to four bytes and this reduces the limit in
> characters dramatically.
> This should be an easy change as there is a codepoint that defines this limit.
> [1] did not work but [2] did
> [1] - http://old.nabble.com/Database-name-length-tt29691419.html
> [2]http://apache-database.10148.n7.nabble.com/Database-name-length-td33182.html
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1.4#6159)
