Re: PQgetlength vs. octet_length()
От | Michael Clark |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PQgetlength vs. octet_length() |
Дата | |
Msg-id | bf5d83510908180804y760c2f64o4e9417929da63c85@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | PQgetlength vs. octet_length() (Michael Clark <codingninja@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: PQgetlength vs. octet_length()
Re: PQgetlength vs. octet_length() |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hello - am I in the wrong mailing list for this sort of problem? :-/
Thanks,
Michael.
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 6:28 PM, Michael Clark <codingninja@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello everyone.Having a weird issue.I have a value inserted into a bytea column, which is about 137megs in size.If I use octet_length() to check the size of the column for this specific row I get this:TestDB=# SELECT octet_length(rawdata) FROM LargeData;octet_length--------------143721188When fetching the row through the C API, and I use PQgetlength() on the column of the row in question I get:(gdb) p (int)PQgetlength(result, rowIndex, i)$3 = 544453159I am wondering if I am lacking knowledge that explains why these values are different, or if something fishy is going on.What led me to investigating this is that fetching this row in a C application is causing a failure. My programs memory usage balloons to 1.3 gigs after executing this:const char *valC = PQgetvalue(result, rowIndex, i);Am I doing something wrong, or is there some ideas what I should investigate next?This seems quite puzzling to me.Thanks in advance for any help/insight offered,Michael.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: