> -----Original Message----- > Maybe... > > Yeah, i think, 16 MByte isn't the real limit, yes. And i've seen queries larger > than that limit, but i can't find the link, sorry. > (maybe depesz.com, dunno, can't remember, i'm sorry) >
What kind of use-case would generate that large of a query? Also, are we talking simply about the query as passed to PostgreSQL or the fully re-written query? If your query is that long you better already be using views or it is likely to be impossible to read. Further, unless you have way too many columns the query planner and rewriter are more likely to choke on the query than any kind of simple IO or memory constraint. Oh, and if you need 16MB because you are using "one table to rule them all" with 500 self-joins then a database crash is really doing you favor... I guess I could see a query of the form: INSERT INTO table (a) VALUES (16mb of content); In fact, that is probably more of what is being asked...as opposed to 16MB select query...anyway... David J. -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
