Re: lo_copy()
От | Nigel J. Andrews |
---|---|
Тема | Re: lo_copy() |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.LNX.4.21.0304011620440.2573-100000@ponder.fairway2k.co.uk обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: lo_copy() (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
On Tue, 1 Apr 2003, Tom Lane wrote: > "Nigel J. Andrews" <nandrews@investsystems.co.uk> writes: > > I wonder if anyone has any comments on this [psuedo] code: > > > new loid := SELECT lo_creat(131072 + 262144); > > > UPDATE pg_largeobject SET > > data = (SELECT data > > FROM pg_largeobject > > WHERE loid = <source loid> AND pageno = 0) > > WHERE loid = <new loid> AND pageno = 0; > > > INSERT INTO pg_largeobject > > (loid, pageno, data) > > (SELECT <new loid>, pageno, data > > FROM pg_largeobject > > WHERE loid = <source loid> AND pageno > 0 > > ); > > I believe this will work, but it requires superuser privileges to > scribble on pg_largeobject directly. Probably would be better to go > through the gruntwork of creating a fully supported lo_copy() operation. > > regards, tom lane > Thanks Tom, I was just a little worried that the page 0 record contained some housekeeping type data that really shouldn't be copied from another page 0. I noticed the scribbling on pg_largeobject priviledge and had created the function with '...INVOKE AS DEFINER...' with a switch into superuser just for that function's definition. Apart from making it more suitable for inclusion in the main distribution, and possibly speed, I'm not sure what recoding in C gives me given that I'm happy at the moment to do it this way. I may look into a C version for submision later. -- Nigel J. Andrews
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: