Daniel Verite wrote: > If we consider what would happen with the latest patch on a platform > with sizeof(int)=8 and a \copy invocation like this: > > \copy (select big,big,big,big,big,big,big,big,...... FROM > (select lpad('', 1024*1024*200) as big) s) TO /dev/null > > if we put enough copies of "big" in the select-list to grow over 2GB, > and then over 4GB.
Oh, right, I was forgetting that. > On a platform with sizeof(int)=4 this should normally fail over 2GB with > "Cannot enlarge string buffer containing $X bytes by $Y more bytes" > > I don't have an ILP64 environment myself to test, but I suspect > it would malfunction instead of cleanly erroring out on such > platforms. I suspect nobody has such platforms, as they are mostly defunct. But I see an easy way to fix it, which is to use sizeof(int32). > Also, without this limit, we can "COPY FROM/TO file" really huge rows, 4GB > and beyond, like I tried successfully during the tests mentioned upthread > (again with len as int64 on x86_64). > So such COPYs would succeed or fail depending on whether they deal with > a file or a network connection. > Do we want this difference in behavior? Such a patch would be for master only. -- Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers