Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> writes:
> * Andrew Dunstan (and...@dunslane.net) wrote:
>> On 06/04/2014 10:03 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I just chanced to notice that if someone were to change the value for
>>> LOBLKSIZE and recompile, there'd be nothing to stop him from starting
>>> that postmaster against an existing database, even though it would
>>> completely misinterpret and mangle any data in pg_largeobject.
> Then again, I've never heard of a field complaint regarding this, so
> pehraps it's not worth it.
I've not heard one either, but there was just somebody asking in
pgsql-general about changing LOBLKSIZE, so he's going to be at risk.
That's not a big enough sample size to make me panic about getting a
hasty fix into 9.4, but I do think we should fix this going forward.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
