| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dmitriy Igrishin <dmitigr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Large objects. |
| Date: | 2010-09-27 14:35:00 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTik_dzHw-iCu8WfjzYMBmzOd1xEqk6d3Lf3iM1yR@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 12:21 PM, Dmitriy Igrishin <dmitigr(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Yes, I am sure. I've tested it by test case in my original post.
> Do you can compile and reproduce it please?
I think the reason lo_read is returning 0 is because it's not reading
anything. See attached test case, cleaned up a bit from yours and
with some error checks added.
According to the documentation, the maximum size of a large object is
2 GB, which may be the reason for this behavior.
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9/static/lo-intro.html
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| d.c | application/octet-stream | 2.1 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Marios Vodas | 2010-09-27 14:37:59 | Re: gist access methods parameter types |
| Previous Message | Gurjeet Singh | 2010-09-27 14:18:55 | Re: Improving prep_buildtree used in VPATH builds |