Re: PQexec() 8191 bytes limit and text fields
От | Mitch Vincent |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PQexec() 8191 bytes limit and text fields |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 006901c10f9b$2f57b830$1251000a@Mitch обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | PQexec() 8191 bytes limit and text fields ("Steve Howe" <howe@carcass.dhs.org>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
First, are you using the latest PG? I was under the impression that all the hard-coded limitations on size had been eliminated in the latest releases. I know for an absolute fact that I can insert multi-megabyte sized text chunks in PG 7.1.2 as I've done just that before... Good luck! -Mitch ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Howe" <howe@carcass.dhs.org> To: <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org> Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 4:51 AM Subject: [HACKERS] PQexec() 8191 bytes limit and text fields > Hello all, > > > Writing my interface application, which use the PQexec library, I > came across the PQexec() queries 8191 bytes limit. > What useful are 4Gb text fields if I have this limit ? > I mean, if a user make an update to this field, with a large value > (let's say, 4Mb), do I have to call PQexec multiple (more then 500) times, > concatenating the strings each time I call it ??? Can't this be better > implemented ? This is too slow, and generates much more traffic then I ever > wish. > This problem also plagues the large objects API, since they're only > a wrapper to the built-in large objects API. > Does anyone have a better way of doing this ? > > Best Regards, > Steve Howe > http://www.vitavoom.com > > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? > > http://www.postgresql.org/search.mpl >
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: