Re: more than 2GB data string save
От | Pavel Stehule |
---|---|
Тема | Re: more than 2GB data string save |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 162867791002092251x6d5b405ctd5145f08d1d5b377@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: more than 2GB data string save (Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: more than 2GB data string save
|
Список | pgsql-general |
2010/2/10 Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>: > On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 11:26 PM, Steve Atkins <steve@blighty.com> wrote: >> >> On Feb 9, 2010, at 9:52 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 9:38 PM, AI Rumman <rummandba@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> How to save 2 GB or more text string in Postgresql? >>>> Which data type should I use? >>> >>> If you have to you can use either the lo interface, or you can use >>> bytea. Large Object (i.e. lo) allows for access much like fopen / >>> fseek etc in C, but the actual data are not stored in a row with >>> other data, but alone in the lo space. Bytea is a legit type that you >>> can have as one of many in a row, but you retrieve the whole thing at >>> once when you get the row. >> >> Bytea definitely won't handle more than 1 GB. I don't think the lo interface >> will handle more than 2GB. > > That really depends on how compressible it is, doesn't it? > no. It is maximal length for varlena. TOAST is next possible step. Regards Pavel Stehule p.s. processing very large SQL values - like bytea, or text longer tens megabytes is very expensive on memory. When you processing 100MB bytea, then you need about 300MB RAM, Using a bytea over 100MB is not good idea. LO interface is better and much more faster. > -- > Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general >
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: