[HACKERS] Re: Large Object problems (was Re: JDBC int8 hack)

2001-04-17 Thread Thomas Lockhart
Erm, int8 isn't long, but an array of 8 int's (unless it's changed). int8 is a 64-bit integer. There used to be a type (maybe called int48 ??) which was 8 4-byte integers. afaicr that is now called oidvector (and there is an int2vector also). The name changes for these latter types were fairly

Re: [HACKERS] Re: Large Object problems (was Re: JDBC int8 hack)

2001-04-17 Thread Tom Lane
Peter T Mount [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ah, it just dawned on me what might be happening: Peter, I'm guessing that you are thinking of "INT48" or some such, the pseudo-integer array type. Kyle is referring to the "int8" 8 byte integer type. Ah, that would explain it. However int8 (as in 8

[HACKERS] Re: Large Object problems (was Re: JDBC int8 hack)

2001-04-17 Thread Kyle VanderBeek
On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 09:11:54AM -0400, Peter T Mount wrote: Erm, int8 isn't long, but an array of 8 int's (unless it's changed). http://postgresql.readysetnet.com/users-lounge/docs/7.0/user/datatype.htm#AEN942 It is very much an 8-byte integer, the correlary to Java's Long/long. -- Kyle.

[HACKERS] Re: Large Object problems (was Re: JDBC int8 hack)

2001-04-10 Thread Kyle VanderBeek
On Tue, Apr 10, 2001 at 02:24:24PM +0100, Peter Mount wrote: At 18:30 09/04/01 -0700, Kyle VanderBeek wrote: This is a new feature? Using indecies is "new"? I guess I really beg to differ. Seems like a bugfix to me (in the "workaround" category). Yes they are. INT8 is not a feature/type