> > I think you are asking for this option:
> > -l LIMIT stop after removing LIMIT large objects
> > which was added in b69f2e36402aaa.
Thank you for informing about -l option in 9.2. Can I build/use this contrib with older pg versions i.e. pg 9.1 ? . Thanks.
> Uh, no, actually that flag seems utterly brain-dead. Who'd want to
> abandon the run after removing some arbitrary subset of the
> known-unreferenced large objects? You'd just have to do all the search
> work over again. What I'm thinking about is doing a COMMIT after every
> N large objects.
> I see that patch has not made it to any released versions yet.
> Is it too late to rethink the design? I propose (a) redefining it
> as committing after every N objects, and (b) having a limit of 1000
> or so objects by default.
That will be really nice and helpful if it automatically clean all of the orphan large objects. Thanks.
> regards, tom lane
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Alvaro Herrera||Date: 2012-03-20 20:16:17|
|Subject: Re: Error trying to compile a simple C trigger|
|Previous:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2012-03-20 20:00:14|
|Subject: Re: Memory usage during sorting|