Tim Perdue wrote:
>
> The Hermit Hacker wrote:
> > > Further, I have had situations where postgres actually had DUPLICATE
> > > ids in a primary key field, probably due to some abort or other nasty
> > > situation in the middle of a commit. How did I recover from That?
> > > Well, I had to run a count(*) next to each ID and select out the rows
> > > where there was more than one of each "unique" id, then reinsert those
> > > rows and drop and rebuild the indexes and reset the sequences.
> >
> > Odd, were you using transactions here, or transactionless?
>
> Does it matter? I suppose it was my programming error that somehow I got
> duplicate primary keys in a table in the database where that should be
> totally impossible under any circumstance? Another stupid
> transactionless program I'm sure.
>
> At any rate, it appears that the main problem I had with postgres (the
> 8K tuple limit) is being fixed and I will mention that in my writeup.
Currently (as of 7.0.x) you could use BLKSIZE=32K + lztext datatype and
get text fields about 64-128K depending on data if you are desperately
after big textfields.
-----------
Hannu
