Re: varlena beyond 1GB and matrix

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>
Cc: PgHacker <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: varlena beyond 1GB and matrix
Date: 2016-12-22 23:23:26
Message-ID: CA+TgmobBTMXRnK-q=E+uqJ4vgz9g7zLDfDLurUuANzQ2QEhy5Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 10:44 PM, Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp> wrote:
>> Handling objects >1GB at all seems like the harder part of the
>> problem.
>>
> I could get your point almost. Does the last line above mention about
> amount of the data object >1GB? even if the "super-varlena" format
> allows 64bit length?

Sorry, I can't understand your question about what I wrote.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2016-12-22 23:24:10 Re: varlena beyond 1GB and matrix
Previous Message Robert Haas 2016-12-22 23:13:51 Re: Fix checkpoint skip logic on idle systems by tracking LSN progress