Re: Large Objects

From: Karsten Hilbert <Karsten(dot)Hilbert(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: pgsql general list <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Large Objects
Date: 2005-01-02 16:38:24
Message-ID: 20050102173824.C566@hermes.hilbert.loc
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

> > >BYTEA is not always pragmatic. What is the file is 100 megs? 256 megs?

> > What is the size when bytea become inafective ?

> I don't think it's so much a matter of effectiveness, it makes no
> difference at all in storage space.
Ah, thanks, good to know. Something new to learn every day...

> The issue is that if you store it
> in a field, accessing it becomes an all or nothing affair, which means
> if it's a 100Mb object, it's all going to be accessed whenever you ask
> for it.
At least for reads you are wrong. You can use substring() on
bytea quite nicely. Remember, however, that that operates on
*bytes*, not characters. Also be careful about encodings being
set for the connection. At least with PostgreSQL < 7.4 we found
we had to "reset client_encoding" despite the docs saying
encodings won't affect bytea field reads.

Karsten
--
GPG key ID E4071346 @ wwwkeys.pgp.net
E167 67FD A291 2BEA 73BD 4537 78B9 A9F9 E407 1346

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message John Sidney-Woollett 2005-01-02 17:22:44 Re:
Previous Message Andreas Kretschmer 2005-01-02 16:06:44 Re: Shared Sequences?