hi,
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 2:58 PM, Kevin Grittner
kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov wrote:
This is related to the SIREAD lock versus ACCESS EXCLUSIVE lock
thread, but seemed different enough to merit spinning off a new
thread.
Our shop hasn't used large objects so far because of the lack of
YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
is there any chance to just make large objects obey the normal
semantics in future?
I sure hope so, but I have no idea how hard that is. I feel the same
about TRUNCATE TABLE now that I recognize the semantic difference
between it and DELETE FROM with no WHERE
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 2:58 PM, Kevin Grittner
kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov wrote:
This is related to the SIREAD lock versus ACCESS EXCLUSIVE lock
thread, but seemed different enough to merit spinning off a new
thread.
Our shop hasn't used large objects so far because of the lack of
security
This is related to the SIREAD lock versus ACCESS EXCLUSIVE lock
thread, but seemed different enough to merit spinning off a new
thread.
Our shop hasn't used large objects so far because of the lack of
security (until 9.1), so I never noticed the rather unusual
transactional semantics of large
On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 12:21 PM, Dmitriy Igrishin dmit...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, I am sure. I've tested it by test case in my original post.
Do you can compile and reproduce it please?
I think the reason lo_read is returning 0 is because it's not reading
anything. See attached test case,
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
According to the documentation, the maximum size of a large object is
2 GB, which may be the reason for this behavior.
In principle, since pg_largeobject stores an integer pageno, we could
support large objects of up to LOBLKSIZE * 2^31 bytes = 4TB
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 10:50 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
According to the documentation, the maximum size of a large object is
2 GB, which may be the reason for this behavior.
In principle, since pg_largeobject stores an integer pageno, we
Hey Robert, Tom
Tom, thank you for explanation!
Ouch. Letting people write data to where they can't get it back from
seems double-plus ungood.
Robert, yes, I agree with you. This is exactly what I wanted to say.
I've implemented a stream class in C++ and this circumstance makes
the code not
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 2:25 PM, Dmitriy Igrishin dmit...@gmail.com wrote:
Hey Robert, Tom
Tom, thank you for explanation!
Ouch. Letting people write data to where they can't get it back from
seems double-plus ungood.
Robert, yes, I agree with you. This is exactly what I wanted to say.
On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 9:13 AM, Dmitriy Igrishin dmit...@gmail.com wrote:
Tell me please, why lo_write() returns me the number of bytes actually
written
when current write location is out of 2GB ? IMO, in this case it should
returns
at least zero.
lo_read() returns zero in this case, and it
Hey Robert,
Yes, I am sure. I've tested it by test case in my original post.
Do you can compile and reproduce it please?
--
// Dmitriy.
Hey all,
Here is simple test case of LOB usage, please, note the comments:
#include libpq-fe.h
#include libpq/libpq-fs.h
int main(int argc, char* argv[])
{
PGconn* c = PQconnectdb(password=test);
PGresult* r = PQexec(c, BEGIN);
PQclear(r);
const unsigned int id = lo_create(c, 0);
Hi all!
I need to operate with large objects through ODBC in
C/C++ program. How can I do that?
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today!
http://my.yahoo.com
---(end of
Bojidar Mihajlov wrote:
Hi all!
I need to operate with large objects through ODBC in
C/C++ program. How can I do that?
Look at the contrib lo data type.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today!
Add to TODO:
* Allow SSL-enabled clients to turn off SSL transfers
---
Tom Lane wrote:
Nigel J. Andrews [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ok, I tried to try this but I can not get SSL to _not_ be used when
connecting
Nigel J. Andrews [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ok, I tried to try this but I can not get SSL to _not_ be used when
connecting via any tcp connection, unless the client hasn't been built
with ssl support of course.
Yeah, I believe that's the way it works. It seems overly fascist of the
SSL code to
On Fri, 6 Jun 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
Nigel J. Andrews [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Now, I did a little bit of testing and when doing a \lo_export oid
filename in psql connected via localhost a SIGPIPE is generated in
write() in libc and psql quit, without printing any message to the
Nigel J. Andrews [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Now, I did a little bit of testing and when doing a \lo_export oid
filename in psql connected via localhost a SIGPIPE is generated in
write() in libc and psql quit, without printing any message to the
terminal. Perhaps interestingly
the file that
Repost just to add the information that this is [now] on 7.3.3, previously on
7.3.2.
Sorry for the noise of the incomplete previous message, although the email
lists seem to be very light this last week. Obviously the mail server is still
feeling under the weather, I presume many posts have
Note, primary list address changed to -general, I'd suggest any followups
remove the -hackers, which I've left in just for 'closure'.
On Fri, 6 Jun 2003, Nigel J. Andrews wrote:
On Fri, 6 Jun 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
Nigel J. Andrews [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Now, I did a little bit of
I realise large objects are liked anymore and that the wire protocol is
changing in 7.4 but I've just posted this message into the PHP documentation:
-- begin
Using php 4.3.0 and PostgreSQL 7.3.1
I can write a simple script in which pg_lo_write seems to always return 1 and not the
number of
On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 12:46:03AM +0530, Chamanya wrote:
Can I use ecpg with large objects? All examples in documentation are for
libpq.
Yes and no. Since ECPG uses libpq it should not be too difficult to use the
lo functions too. But there is no way to use them via some EXEC SQL
statements.
Hi all,
Can I use ecpg with large objects? All examples in documentation are for
libpq.
Thanks
Shridhar
_
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
---(end of
When I delete a table that has an OID, the OID does not get deleted
correct? How can I delete the data from the large object?
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
(send unregister
Hello, All!
I had PostgreSQL 7.0.3 (7.1 now) and one nice day I've noticed that much
number of my BLOBs are broken! Although they seems to be with good content
in file system (xinv[0-9]+ files) I was not able to get them via
lo_export... After spending some time trying to fix it, I decided to
Hi,
I had PostgreSQL 7.0.3 (7.1 now) and one nice day I've noticed that much
number of my BLOBs are broken! Although they seems to be with good content
in file system (xinv[0-9]+ files) I was not able to get them via
lo_export... After spending some time trying to fix it, I decided to write
26 matches
Mail list logo
