Re: pg_dump and large files - is this a problem? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Philip Warner
Subject Re: pg_dump and large files - is this a problem?
Date
Msg-id 5.1.0.14.0.20021003142704.038c41a0@mail.rhyme.com.au
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_dump and large files - is this a problem?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
At 11:06 AM 2/10/2002 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>It needs to get done; AFAIK no one has stepped up to do it.  Do you want
>to?

I'll have a look; my main concern at the moment is that off_t and size_t 
are totally non-committal as to structure; in particular I can probably 
safely assume that they are unsigned, but can I assume that they have the 
same endian--ness as int etc?

If so, then will it be valid to just read/write each byte in endian order? 
How likely is it that the 64 bit value will actually be implemented as a 
structure like:

off_t { int lo; int hi; }

which effectively ignores endian-ness at the 32 bit scale?



----------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Warner                    |     __---_____
Albatross Consulting Pty. Ltd.   |----/       -  \
(A.B.N. 75 008 659 498)          |          /(@)   ______---_
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   |/



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Lamar Owen
Date:
Subject: Re: v7.2.3 - tag'd, packaged ... need it checked ...
Next
From: Lamar Owen
Date:
Subject: Re: v7.2.3 - tag'd, packaged ... need it checked ...