Re: Re: Large Objects
От | Edward Q. Bridges |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Re: Large Objects |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200009211457.e8LEv2s05869@hub.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Re: Large Objects (Alessio Bragadini <alessio@albourne.com>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
in effect, this turns the filesystem into a "poor-mans" balanced tree. the rdbms gives you a "rich-mans" balanced tree, but along with the overhead of the rdbms. cheers --e-- On Thu, 21 Sep 2000 15:20:39 +0300, Alessio Bragadini wrote: > Neil Conway wrote: > > > > a BLOB. Conversely, Unix filesystems store directories as unsorted > > > lists, which are a lot slower to search than the database's > > > structured indexes. > > > Wow, can anyone confirm this (with Postgres preferrably)? In talking > > with some developers at my old job, they all agreed that storing large > > pieces of data (1k < x < 16K) was significantly faster on the FS than > > I believe he's talking about storing all files in the same directory, > which is simply The Wrong Way for a number of reasons. While saving a > large number of external files, we use a sub-dir structure in the form > /data/f4/d3/12/myfile.bin in order to spread the number of files in a > tree pseudorandomly. This is the same approach used by the Squid > webcache. > > -- > Alessio F. Bragadini alessio@albourne.com > APL Financial Services http://village.albourne.com > Nicosia, Cyprus phone: +357-2-755750 > > "It is more complicated than you think" > -- The Eighth Networking Truth from RFC 1925 >
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: