| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Hiroshi Saito <z-saito(at)guitar(dot)ocn(dot)ne(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Yoshiyuki Asaba <y-asaba(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_restore fails with a custom backup file |
| Date: | 2006-12-18 16:45:30 |
| Message-ID: | 200612181645.kBIGjUV16383@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> > Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >> A question though - is there any *gain* from using 64-bit offsets in the
> >> actual backend? The change could of course be done in port.h, but that
>
> > No, not really. All files are kept < 1gig for the backend.
>
> Not so: consider a backend COPY reading or writing a multi-gig table.
> This will fail if the platform hasn't got largefile support.
Good point --- but do we do any seeks in COPY files? I don't think so,
so I don't see how we would benefit from large file support there.
Certainly people are dumping >2 gig files.
--
Bruce Momjian bruce(at)momjian(dot)us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-12-18 16:49:30 | Re: Operator class group proposal |
| Previous Message | Matt Miller | 2006-12-18 16:15:43 | Re: pgcluster-1.7.0rc1-patch |