Re: [GENERAL] literal limits in 8.3

2008-11-24 Thread Tom Lane
"Greg Sabino Mullane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> What it boils down to is lack of error checking in psql (not the >> backend). > What is it about certain boxes that causes the failure, but not on others? It's a matter of having the out-of-memory condition occur just at the wrong step, ie, the

Re: [GENERAL] literal limits in 8.3

2008-11-24 Thread Greg Sabino Mullane
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: RIPEMD160 > Hmm ... the third machine I tried was able to reproduce the problem. > > What it boils down to is lack of error checking in psql (not the > backend). What is it about certain boxes that causes the failure, but not on others? - -- Greg Sabin

Re: [GENERAL] literal limits in 8.3

2008-11-24 Thread Tom Lane
Sam Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 10:45:42AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> Well, I can't reproduce that here. Something strange about your >> configuration maybe? > Not that I know of. I've just created a test cluster to make sure and I > get the same behaviour. Hmm ..

Re: [GENERAL] literal limits in 8.3

2008-11-24 Thread Sam Mason
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 10:45:42AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Sam Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > It's a normal 32bit Intel Debian system, nothing much special done > > to increase the kernel/user split or anything like that as far as I > > remember on this box. If I try with larger sizes it f

Re: [GENERAL] literal limits in 8.3

2008-11-24 Thread Tom Lane
Sam Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > It's a normal 32bit Intel Debian system, nothing much special done > to increase the kernel/user split or anything like that as far as I > remember on this box. If I try with larger sizes it falls over with > "out of memory", but up until around 755MB (760MB

Re: [GENERAL] literal limits in 8.3

2008-11-24 Thread Sam Mason
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 09:06:14AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Sam Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > However, I've just tried today and am getting some strange results. The > > strange results are that above a certain length PG says that it's put a > > string in OK but there's nothing there when

Re: [GENERAL] literal limits in 8.3

2008-11-24 Thread Tom Lane
Sam Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > However, I've just tried today and am getting some strange results. The > strange results are that above a certain length PG says that it's put a > string in OK but there's nothing there when I look back afterward. I get "out of memory" complaints from psql

[GENERAL] literal limits in 8.3

2008-11-24 Thread Sam Mason
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 12:08:30PM -0700, Scott Marlowe wrote: > There are no character limits for sql statements in pgsql That's what I thought! However, I've just tried today and am getting some strange results. The strange results are that above a certain length PG says that it's put a string