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 5.1.0.14.0.20021004131217.0282b2a0@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 11:07 PM 3/10/2002 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>A non-integral representation
>of off_t is theoretically possible but I don't believe it exists in
>practice.

Excellent. So I can just read/write the bytes in an appropriate order and 
expect whatever size it is to be a single intXX.

Fine with me, unless anybody voices another opinion in the next day, I will 
proceed. I just have this vague recollection of seeing a header file with a 
more complex structure for off_t. I'm probably dreaming.




----------------------------------------------------------------
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: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_dump and large files - is this a problem?
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Return of INSTEAD rules