On 2010-12-08, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Adrian Klaver <adrian.kla...@gmail.com> writes: >> On 12/08/2010 08:04 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> The rationale for having a limit of this sort is (a) we *don't* want >>> the upper limit of declarable length to be encoding-dependent; and >>> (b) if you are trying to declare an upper limit that's got more than a >>> few digits in it, you almost certainly ought to not be declaring a limit >>> at all. > >> Well that explains it :) Would it be possible to change the below >> section in the docs to state that the declared max value of n is limited >> to a max string size of 10Mb? > > I don't really see any point in that. The value is meant to be an order > of magnitude or so more than anything that's sane according to point (b). > If you think you need to know what it is, you're already doing it wrong.
I have some values of perhaps 20Mb that I might want to store samples of in a partitioned table. (so I can delete them easily) what's the right way? I guess I could just keep them as disk files and rotate the directories as I rotate partitions. -- ⚂⚃ 100% natural -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
