| From: | "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "zhaoxin" <zhaox(at)necas(dot)nec(dot)com(dot)cn>, <pgsql-odbc(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: problem about maximum row size ? |
| Date: | 2006-04-03 08:29:42 |
| Message-ID: | E7F85A1B5FF8D44C8A1AF6885BC9A0E4011C99A6@ratbert.vale-housing.co.uk |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-odbc |
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgsql-odbc-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
> [mailto:pgsql-odbc-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of Bruce Momjian
> Sent: 03 April 2006 04:41
> To: Tom Lane
> Cc: zhaoxin; pgsql-odbc(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [ODBC] problem about maximum row size ?
>
> FAQ updated with new number, and mention that increasing
> block size quadruples it.
I've updated the limitations page on the website, though I didn't bother
with the blocksize hack on there.
Whilst we're on the subject, is 16TB for a table still correct given CE
partitioning?
Regards, Dave
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Marc Herbert | 2006-04-03 08:55:30 | Re: Unicode is not UTF-8. was :psqlODBC-Driver Test / text |
| Previous Message | Thomas Chabaud | 2006-04-03 07:05:20 | Re: Strange Update query ... |