On Wed, 5 Aug 1998, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Peter,
> >
> > I have just finished up some other stuff in the backend, and I was
> > wondering what to do next. My personal list include a cleanup of the lo
> > type. Specifically:
> >
> > 1. Assign a fixed OID to the LO type so that attributes of this type
> > can easily be identified.
> >
> > 2. Write a VACUUM LO procedure.
> >
> > 3. Extend/verify the existing internal lo functions to work with the
> > new type.
> >
> > I know that more can/should be done in this area, but I only have so much
> > time. I am aware the you have done some work on this in the contrib area.
> > Were you planning on handling any (or all) of these issues as part of the
> > 6.4 base release? I will gladly move on to something else.
> >
>
> We should also make a large object type, rather than using inv_ to
> identify it. It is on the TODO list, and I can implement it whenever
> you want.
agreed - although that would imply a different method of storing them. One
of the problems I have with VACUUM LO is that using the existing oid
method (for compatibility) would not work with the new type.
Either using a different form of storage, or a different prefix would sort
this problem (the latter would be the easiest).
>
> --
> Bruce Momjian | 830 Blythe Avenue
> maillist@candle.pha.pa.us | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
> + If your life is a hard drive, | (610) 353-9879(w)
> + Christ can be your backup. | (610) 853-3000(h)
>
--
Peter T Mount peter@retep.org.uk or petermount@earthling.net
Main Homepage: http://www.retep.org.uk
PostgreSQL JDBC Faq: http://www.retep.org.uk/postgres