Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I don't think this is the right approach. Maybe it would be reasonable > > to add another arm to the %union instead, not sure. The problem is the > > amount of ugly casts you have to use below. The scanner code seems to > > think that a constant larger than the biggest int4 should be treated as > > float, so I'm not sure why this would work anyway. > > I'm not sure that I see the point of this at all. ISTM the entire > reason for using a cursor is that you're going to fetch the results > in bite-size pieces. I don't see the current Postgres source code > surviving into the era where >2G rows is considered bite-size ;-)
Think MOVE to a specific section of the cursor > 2gig. I can see that happening. -- Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
