| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: 64-bit API for large object |
| Date: | 2012-08-22 12:02:21 |
| Message-ID: | 1345636941.21724.1.camel@vanquo.pezone.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 2012-08-22 at 01:14 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> > On Wed, 2012-08-22 at 07:27 +0900, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> >> I found this in the TODO list:
> >> Add API for 64-bit large object access
> >> If this is a still valid TODO item and nobody is working on this, I
> >> would like to work in this.
>
> > Large objects are limited to 2 GB in size, so a 64-bit API doesn't sound
> > very useful to me at the moment.
>
> Not entirely. pg_largeobject.pageno is int32, but that's still 2G pages
> not bytes, so there's three or so orders of magnitude that could be
> gotten by expanding the client-side API before we'd have to change the
> server's on-disk representation.
Well then a 64-bit API would be very useful. Go for it. :-)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2012-08-22 12:48:52 | Expressions without type |
| Previous Message | Sachin Srivastava | 2012-08-22 11:28:02 | Re: PostgreSQL 9.2beta4 (& git HEAD) server crash on creating extension plpython3u |