Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> > Actually, no.  If I cut'n paste the number from psql to
> > cat > foo
> > <shift> <insert>
> > then only 4096 chars are copied.  (Amusingly, I can't add a newline to
> > ^D and close the file.  I must delete one char to do that.)
> 
> Hmm, cut buffer limitation in X or someplace?  I definitely get the
> right number of characters into the file written with \g, and what looks
> like a reasonable number of screensful of plain psql output.  If Bruce
> is seeing the right number of dashes and the wrong number of data
> characters in his \g output then *something* is pretty weird there.

Well, I just tried the \g test and it is correct (12675 digits or so).

-- 
Alvaro Herrera                                http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.

In response to

• Re: Numeric 508 datatype at 2005-12-02 20:15:29 from Tom Lane

Responses

• Re: Numeric 508 datatype at 2005-12-02 20:44:11 from Bruce Momjian

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Joshua D. Drake	Date: 2005-12-02 20:27:41
	Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline?
Previous:	From: Greg Stark	Date: 2005-12-02 20:25:58
	Subject: Re: Reducing relation locking overhead

pgsql-patches by date

Next:	From: Joshua D. Drake	Date: 2005-12-02 20:27:41
	Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline?
Previous:	From: Tom Lane	Date: 2005-12-02 20:15:29
	Subject: Re: Numeric 508 datatype

pgsql-general by date

Next:	From: Will Glynn	Date: 2005-12-02 20:29:32
	Subject: Re: memory leak under heavy load?
Previous:	From: Harakiri	Date: 2005-12-02 20:26:03
	Subject: Re: deadlock detected - when multiple threads try to update one table