From: Wolfgang Hottgenroth <wn@kja-essen.de>
To: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu>
Cc: woho@ieee.org
Cc: pgsql-interfaces@hub.org
Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] problems with large-objects
Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 17:32:07 +0200
Message-ID: <37F62577.43286F68@kja-essen.de> (raw)
References: <37F5B8DD.68DB625F@kja-essen.de>
<37F61F8E.FEF2A538@alumni.caltech.edu>
Hi Thomas, hi all,
Thomas Lockhart wrote:
>
> > 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.
Have many thanks for that fast answer. It is new to me, that
large-object-operations requires transactions. Did I read the manual to
fast or isn't it written down there?
I will try it.
Wolfgang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org
Cc: wn@kja-essen.de, lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu, woho@ieee.org, pgsql-interfaces@hub.org
Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] problems with large-objects
In-Reply-To: <37F62577.43286F68@kja-essen.de>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox