Re: WG: [QUESTIONS] Re: [HACKERS] text should be a blob field - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Vadim B. Mikheev
Subject Re: WG: [QUESTIONS] Re: [HACKERS] text should be a blob field
Date
Msg-id 34FF5EAA.A7792D0@sable.krasnoyarsk.su
Whole thread Raw
In response to WG: [QUESTIONS] Re: [HACKERS] text should be a blob field  (Zeugswetter Andreas SARZ <Andreas.Zeugswetter@telecom.at>)
Responses Re: WG: [QUESTIONS] Re: [HACKERS] text should be a blob field  (Peter T Mount <psqlhack@maidast.demon.co.uk>)
List 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

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "D. Dante Lorenso"
Date:
Subject: PostgreSQL and DBI/DBD...vs Pg.pm
Next
From: "Billy G. Allie"
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PATCHES] Changes to sequence.c