Note, I'm not sure this belongs in -hackers so I've added -general but left
-hackers in so that list can at least see that it's going to -general.
On Thu, 8 Aug 2002, mark Kirkwood wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I just spent some of the morning helping a customer build Pg 7.2.1 from
> source in order to get Linux largefile support in pg_dump etc. They
> possibly would have kept using the binary RPMs if they had this feature.
>
> This got me to wondering why the Redhat/Mandrake...etc binary RPMS are
> built without it.
>
> Would including default largefile support in Linux RPMs be a good idea ?
>
> (I am presuming that such RPMs are built by the Pg community and
> "supplied" to the various distros... apologies if I have this all wrong...)
I must admit that I am fairly new to PostgreSQL but I have used it and read
stuff about it and I'm not sure what you mean. Could you explain what you
did?
A quick scan of the source shows that there may be an issue in
storage/file/buffile.c:BufFileSeek() is that the sort of thing you are talking
about? Or maybe I've got it completely wrong and you're talking about adding
code to pg_dump although I thought that could already handle large
objects. Actually, I'm going to shut up now before I really do show my
ignorance and let you answer.
--
Nigel J. Andrews
Director
---
Logictree Systems Limited
Computer Consultants
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
