Received: from sss.sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [206.210.65.6])
	by hub.org (8.9.2/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA91571
	for <pgsql-interfaces@postgreSQL.org>;
	Thu, 25 Feb 1999 10:02:32 -0500 (EST)
	(envelope-from tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us)
Received: from sss.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.sss.pgh.pa.us (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA28334;
	Thu, 25 Feb 1999 10:01:54 -0500 (EST)
To: Matthew Hagerty <matthew@venux.net>
cc: pgsql-interfaces@postgreSQL.org
Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] What's that query limit again? 
In-reply-to: Your message of Thu, 25 Feb 1999 02:58:37 -0500
	<4.1.19990225025132.00990d90@mail.venux.net>
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 10:01:53 -0500
Message-ID: <28332.919954913@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

Matthew Hagerty <matthew@venux.net> writes:
> The query limit is 8K right?  What about the size of rows returned by a
> select?

There's an 8K limit on the text of a submitted query (I hope to
eliminate that soon, but probably not in time for 6.5).  As far as
I can think offhand, there is no a-priori limit on the size of a
query result in either columns or rows.

(Well, I notice a 16-bit column count in T messages, so the FE/BE
protocol will break at 32K or 64K columns in a result, but hopefully
no one will ever run into that...)

Have you tried it?  An experiment would've taken less time than
querying the list, I'm sure.

			regards, tom lane