Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Largeobject Access Controls (r2460)

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Greg Smith" <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "KaiGai Kohei" <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>, "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "KaiGai Kohei" <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>, "Takahiro Itagaki" <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Jaime Casanova" <jcasanov(at)systemguards(dot)com(dot)ec>
Subject: Re: Largeobject Access Controls (r2460)
Date: 2010-01-24 17:56:49
Message-ID: 4B5C3581020000250002EB08@gw.wicourts.gov (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
 
> It might be better to try a test case with lighter-weight objects,
> say 5 million simple functions.
 
So the current database is expendable?  I'd just as soon delete it
before creating the other one, if you're fairly confident the other
one will do it.
 
-Kevin

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2010-01-24 18:02:25
Subject: Re: Review: listagg aggregate
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-01-24 17:54:54
Subject: Re: tab completion for prepared transactions?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group