Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 10:03 PM, Josh Berkus <j...@agliodbs.com> wrote:
>> On 06/07/2016 08:42 AM, Nicolas Paris wrote:
>>> Will this 1GO restriction is supposed to increase in a near future ?
>> Not planned, no. Thing is, that's the limit for a field in general, not
>> just JSON; changing it would be a fairly large patch. It's desireable,
>> but AFAIK nobody is working on it.
> And there are other things to consider on top of that, like the
> maximum allocation size for palloc, the maximum query string size,
> COPY, etc. This is no small project, and the potential side-effects
> should not be underestimated.
It's also fair to doubt that client-side code would "just work" with
no functionality or performance problems for such large values.
I await with interest the OP's results on other JSON processors that
have no issues with GB-sized JSON strings.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
