Re: [HACKERS] Problems with >2GB tables on Linux 2.0

> > mcrl3_1_partnumber_index
> > 
> > And it works fine.. I did some selects on data that should have ended up
> > in the .1 file, and it works great.  The best thing about it, is that it
> > seems at least as fast as MSSQL on the same data, if not faster..
> 
> This is what I got when I tested it using a reduced file size. It's what
> made me decide to reduce the size by 1 in the patch I posted earlier.
> 
> However, I'm using John's suggestion of reducing the file size a lot more,
> to ensure we don't hit any math errors, etc. So the max file size is about
> 1.6Gb.

I can imagine people finding that strange.  It it really needed.  Is
there some math that could overflow with a larger value?


--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026