Received: from localhost (IDENT:root@hectic-2.jpl.nasa.gov [128.149.68.204])
	by hub.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA53429
	for <pgsql-interfaces@hub.org>; Sat, 2 Oct 1999 11:07:29 -0400 (EDT)
	(envelope-from lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu)
Received: from alumni.caltech.edu (lockhart@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by localhost (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA19002;
	Sat, 2 Oct 1999 15:06:55 GMT
Sender: lockhart@hub.org
Message-ID: <37F61F8E.FEF2A538@alumni.caltech.edu>
Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 15:06:54 +0000
From: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.0.36 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: woho@ieee.org
CC: pgsql-interfaces@hub.org
Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] problems with large-objects
References: <37F5B8DD.68DB625F@kja-essen.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> did anyone of you ever saw some strange problems with large objects and
> the postgresql 6.51?

I don't work with Large Objects, but I am pretty sure that the
behavior was changed/fixed for v6.5 to *require* all large object
manipulation to happen within a transaction. This was always a
requirement, but Postgres did not enforce it and had some potentially
bad behavior lurking as a result.

                   - Thomas

-- 
Thomas Lockhart				lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu
South Pasadena, California