Received: from redbox.venux.net (redbox.venux.net [216.47.238.10])
	by hub.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA27974
	for <pgsql-interfaces@postgreSQL.org>;
	Tue, 13 Jul 1999 12:01:43 -0400 (EDT)
	(envelope-from matthew@venux.net)
Received: from thunder (net177138.hcv.com [209.153.177.138])
	by redbox.venux.net (Postfix) with SMTP
	id F3BC62E20E; Tue, 13 Jul 1999 11:56:51 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <4.1.19990713115720.009c84b0@mail.venux.net>
X-Sender: mhagerty@mail.venux.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 12:02:18 -0400
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Matthew Hagerty <matthew@venux.net>
Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] 8K query limit in 6.5? 
Cc: pgsql-interfaces@postgreSQL.org
In-Reply-To: <22381.931874344@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <Your message of Mon, 12 Jul 1999 23:38:29 -0400
	<4.1.19990712233739.009cff10@mail.venux.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

stir, stir, stir... please make this bigger!  Or tell me how and I'll do it. :)

Is it really such a big deal to increase the size of a query that pg can
handle?  I'm talking about the size of a query submitted to pg, from what I
understand there is no limit on the record (tuple) size that can be
returned from pg.  Is my understanding correct?

Thanks,
Matthew

At 09:59 AM 7/13/99 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>Matthew Hagerty <matthew@venux.net> writes:
>> Was the 8K query limit increased in 6.5?
>
>Nope.
>
>I tried to stir up some enthusiasm for fixing it in 6.6, but didn't
>have much success --- too soon to say whether it will happen for 6.6
>or be postponed again.
>
>			regards, tom lane
>