Re: WG: [QUESTIONS] Re: [HACKERS] text should be a blob field

From: "Vadim B(dot) Mikheev" <vadim(at)sable(dot)krasnoyarsk(dot)su>
To: Zeugswetter Andreas SARZ <Andreas(dot)Zeugswetter(at)telecom(dot)at>
Cc: "'pgsql-hackers(at)hub(dot)org'" <pgsql-hackers(at)hub(dot)org>
Subject: Re: WG: [QUESTIONS] Re: [HACKERS] text should be a blob field
Date: 1998-03-06 02:25:46
Message-ID: 34FF5EAA.A7792D0@sable.krasnoyarsk.su
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Zeugswetter Andreas SARZ wrote:
>
> > >> Allowing text to use blobs for values larger than the current block
> > size
> > >> would hit the same problem.
> > > When I told about multi-representation feature I ment that applications
> > > will not be affected by how text field is stored - in tuple or somewhere
> >
> > > else. Is this Ok for you ?
> >
> > This is also what I would have in mind. But I guess a change to the fe-be
> > protocol would still be necessary, since the client now allocates
> > a fixed amount of memory to receive one tuple, wasn't it ?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I don't know, but imho it's not too hard to implement.

Vadim

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Billy G. Allie 1998-03-06 03:44:31 Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PATCHES] Changes to sequence.c
Previous Message D. Dante Lorenso 1998-03-05 19:50:39 PostgreSQL and DBI/DBD...vs Pg.pm