| From: | wieck(at)debis(dot)com (Jan Wieck) |
|---|---|
| To: | maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us (Bruce Momjian) |
| Cc: | jwieck(at)debis(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Arbitrary tuple size |
| Date: | 1999-07-08 17:17:17 |
| Message-ID: | m112HnR-0003ktC@orion.SAPserv.Hamburg.dsh.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I agree this is the way to go. There is nothing I can think of that is
> limited to how large a tuple can be.
Outch - I can.
Having an index on a varlen field that now doesn't fit any
more into an index block. Wouldn't this cause problems? Well
it's bad database design to index fields that will receive
that long data because indexing them will blow up the
database but it must work anyway.
Jan
--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#========================================= wieck(at)debis(dot)com (Jan Wieck) #
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 1999-07-08 17:33:06 | Re: [HACKERS] Arbitrary tuple size |
| Previous Message | David Mansfield | 1999-07-08 17:15:36 | RE: (bounced, help me!) [PORTS] Port Bug Report: calling notify in pl/pgsql proc causes core dump |