Re: [HACKERS] SPI procedure for removing large objects
От | Peter T Mount |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] SPI procedure for removing large objects |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.LNX.3.96.980805215449.793A-100000@maidast.retep.org.uk обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] SPI procedure for removing large objects (David Hartwig <daveh@insightdist.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] SPI procedure for removing large objects
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 5 Aug 1998, David Hartwig wrote: > Peter, > > I have just finished up some other stuff in the backend, and I was > wondering what to do next. My personal list include a cleanup of the lo > type. Specifically: > > 1. Assign a fixed OID to the LO type so that attributes of this type > can easily be identified. > > 2. Write a VACUUM LO procedure. > > 3. Extend/verify the existing internal lo functions to work with the > new type. > > I know that more can/should be done in this area, but I only have so much > time. I am aware the you have done some work on this in the contrib area. > Were you planning on handling any (or all) of these issues as part of the > 6.4 base release? I will gladly move on to something else. I claimed the parts of the TODO list that deal with these issues a few weeks ago. Since then, I've tried several solutions (the one in contrib was an attempt that uses triggers. It works but has holes - like DROP TABLE doesnt fire a trigger). The method I think is best is the vacuum procedure. Now, I have here the basic outline for it, and how it interacts with the existing system using oid's, but currently I can't test it as postgresql is still broken (for me). -- Peter T Mount peter@retep.org.uk or petermount@earthling.net Main Homepage: http://www.retep.org.uk PostgreSQL JDBC Faq: http://www.retep.org.uk/postgres
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: