At 14:02 11/07/00 +0200, Jan Wieck wrote:
> AFAICS, we need to detoast values for index inserts allways
> and have another toaster inside the index access methods at
> some day.
We might not need it...at least not in the furst pass.
> In the meantime we should decide a safe maximum
> index tuple size and emit an explanative error message on the
> attempt to insert oversized index entries instead of possibly
> corrupting the index.
Can I suggest that we also put out a warning when defining an index using a
field with a (potentially) unlimited size? Indexing a text field will
mostly be a bizarre thing to do, but, eg, indexing the first 255 chars of a
text field (via substr) might not be.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Warner | __---_____
Albatross Consulting Pty. Ltd. |----/ - \
(A.C.N. 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 |/
