Re: pg_dump and large files - is this a problem?

From: Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "PostgreSQL Development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_dump and large files - is this a problem?
Date: 2002-10-03 04:39:13
Message-ID: 5.1.0.14.0.20021003142704.038c41a0@mail.rhyme.com.au
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

At 11:06 AM 2/10/2002 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>It needs to get done; AFAIK no one has stepped up to do it. Do you want
>to?

I'll have a look; my main concern at the moment is that off_t and size_t
are totally non-committal as to structure; in particular I can probably
safely assume that they are unsigned, but can I assume that they have the
same endian--ness as int etc?

If so, then will it be valid to just read/write each byte in endian order?
How likely is it that the 64 bit value will actually be implemented as a
structure like:

off_t { int lo; int hi; }

which effectively ignores endian-ness at the 32 bit scale?

----------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Warner | __---_____
Albatross Consulting Pty. Ltd. |----/ - \
(A.B.N. 75 008 659 498) | /(@) ______---_
Tel: (+61) 0500 83 82 81 | _________ \
Fax: (+61) 0500 83 82 82 | ___________ |
Http://www.rhyme.com.au | / \|
| --________--
PGP key available upon request, | /
and from pgp5.ai.mit.edu:11371 |/

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Lamar Owen 2002-10-03 05:34:07 Re: v7.2.3 - tag'd, packaged ... need it checked ...
Previous Message Lamar Owen 2002-10-03 04:29:18 Re: v7.2.3 - tag'd, packaged ... need it checked ...