Re: [JDBC] BUG #7766: Running a DML statement that affects more than 4 billion rows results in an exception

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com>
Cc: zelaine(at)amazon(dot)com, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, List <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [JDBC] BUG #7766: Running a DML statement that affects more than 4 billion rows results in an exception
Date: 2012-12-21 20:17:06
Message-ID: 6059.1356121026@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs pgsql-jdbc

Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com> writes:
> So an unsigned long won't fit inside a java long either, but hopefully it
> will never be necessary. That would be a huge number of changes.

I think we'll all be safely dead by the time anybody manages to process
2^63 rows in one PG command ;-). If you can widen the value from int to
long on the Java side, that should be sufficient.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2012-12-22 13:06:18 Re: BUG #7763: "CREATE TABLE ... (LIKE ... INCLUDING INDEXES ...)" does not work with indexes on composite types
Previous Message ta 2012-12-21 19:10:42 "text to text" operator redefinition ignored

Browse pgsql-jdbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Chen Huajun 2012-12-24 10:26:29 Re: performance problem of Failover Datasource?
Previous Message Dave Cramer 2012-12-21 18:55:43 Re: [BUGS] BUG #7766: Running a DML statement that affects more than 4 billion rows results in an exception