On 24 Jul 2015, at 16:48, Steve Ebersole wrote: > Do we want to consider automatically applying known database limits on > various identifier lengths? This is trickier to implement than it > might > sound. And it would definitely need to wait for the reworking of > annotation binding. But in general I wonder if y'all see this as a > desirable feature. And if so, should that be just for implicit names? > Or > explicit names as well? I could see it be valuable for easier cross db testing, but all users custom queries would be easily broken unless you have something very deterministic. If we do it think I as a user would prefer at least get a warning or be able to turn on "strict" mode to catch issues where I did not realise "MY_SUPER_AWESOME_COLUMN_NAME_CANT_ALWAYS_BE_USED". /max http://about.me/maxandersen _______________________________________________ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev

He is talking about native (sql) queries. If a user defines a native query using his example column name MY_SUPER_AWESOME_COLUMN_NAME_CANT_ALWAYS_BE_USED, then when we replace that because they deploy on to "database product X" which limits identifier lengths to 10... he worries that the users query now fails. But of course he glosses over the fact that the app would not work on "database product X" with or without this change because "database product X" simply would not support a column named MY_SUPER_AWESOME_COLUMN_NAME_CANT_ALWAYS_BE_USED (from say a mapping). I think in general the idea of trying to combine native sql queries and database portability is just asking for trouble. On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 1:23 PM Sanne Grinovero <sanne(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: > > Hi Max, could you make an example please? > Looks like you are interpreting Steve's email in a different way than me. > > On 24 Jul 2015 21:43, "Max Rydahl Andersen" <manderse(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >> >> On 24 Jul 2015, at 16:48, Steve Ebersole wrote: >> >> > Do we want to consider automatically applying known database limits on >> > various identifier lengths? This is trickier to implement than it >> > might >> > sound. And it would definitely need to wait for the reworking of >> > annotation binding. But in general I wonder if y'all see this as a >> > desirable feature. And if so, should that be just for implicit names? >> > Or >> > explicit names as well? >> >> I could see it be valuable for easier cross db testing, but all users >> custom queries >> would be easily broken unless you have something very deterministic. >> >> If we do it think I as a user would prefer at least get a warning or be >> able to turn on "strict" mode >> to catch issues where I did not realise >> "MY_SUPER_AWESOME_COLUMN_NAME_CANT_ALWAYS_BE_USED". >> >> /max >> http://about.me/maxandersen >> >> _______________________________________________ >> hibernate-dev mailing list >> hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev