Re: Re: 7.2 items

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Thomas Swan <tswan(at)olemiss(dot)edu>, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Re: 7.2 items
Date: 2001-06-27 16:44:29
Message-ID: 8802.993660269@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> Tom Lane writes:
>> What for/why bother? A toastable bytea column would do just as well.

> There's still a 1 or 2 GB limit for data stored in that.

1 Gb, I believe ... but LOs are not a lot better; they'd max out at 2 or
at most 4 Gb, depending on whether the code always treats offsets as
unsigned.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hannu Krosing 2001-06-27 18:33:35 Re: Re: 7.2 items
Previous Message Frank Ch. Eigler 2001-06-27 16:41:09 Re: Re: Encrypting pg_shadow passwords