Re: pg_dump and large files - is this a problem?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at>
Cc: "Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, "Philip Warner" <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au>, "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Giles Lean" <giles(at)nemeton(dot)com(dot)au>
Subject: Re: pg_dump and large files - is this a problem?
Date: 2002-10-29 13:37:29
Message-ID: 20965.1035898649@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at> writes:
>> Yeah. AFAICS the only way around this is to avoid doing any I/O
>> operations in the flex-generated files. Fortunately, that's not much
>> of a restriction.

> Unfortunately I do not think that is sufficient, since the problem is already
> at the #include level. The compiler barfs on the second #include <unistd.h>
> from postgres.h

AIX is too stupid to wrap unistd.h in an "#ifndef" to protect against
double inclusion? I suppose we could do that for them...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2002-10-29 13:50:46 Re: Request for supported platforms
Previous Message Tara Piorkowski 2002-10-29 13:22:21 Re: Request for supported platforms