Re: Large objects.
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Large objects. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTimygJfJRHjEa1bGMwkU-oPGMqdX62FWCSQcCXO6@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Large objects. (Dmitriy Igrishin <dmitigr@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Large objects.
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 9:13 AM, Dmitriy Igrishin <dmitigr@gmail.com> wrote: > Tell me please, why lo_write() returns me the number of bytes "actually > written" > when current write location is out of 2GB ? IMO, in this case it should > returns > at least zero. > lo_read() returns zero in this case, and it is correct, IMO. Hmm, are you sure? If the behavior of lo_read and lo_write is not symmetric, that's probably not good, but I don't see anything obvious in the code to make me think that's the case. Returning 0 for a value >= 2^31 seems problematic unless there is no possibility of a short read (or write). -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: