Re: Re: Postgres and Oracle differences and questions
От | Hannu Krosing |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Re: Postgres and Oracle differences and questions |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3A8155DF.80007@tm.ee обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Postgres and Oracle differences and questions (Jan Wieck <janwieck@Yahoo.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Re: Postgres and Oracle differences and questions
|
Список | pgsql-interfaces |
Jan Wieck wrote: > D. Johnson wrote: > >> I have recently been working on several projects that use MSAccess as a >> front end to both a Postgres and Oracle DB. Unfortunately, I have >> noticed some differences and limitations in Oracle that seem to make >> Postgres look like a better choice for the application. My problem is >> with the block sizing differences in PG and Oracle. It seems that when >> mapping memo types from Access to Postgres you could create a text type >> in Postgres that emulates the Access memo type, and you could define a >> table with any number of these types of fields. In Oracle you can only >> have one memo field mapped to a table with a max size equal I believe to >> the block size, and if you use the max block size then you cannot define >> any other fields in the same table. >> >> I am curious how Postgres handles text types, is a var char or does it >> allocate the full 8K for the text type. In Oracle, the size of the table >> definition has to be within the block boundary, is the same restriction >> true in Postgres. > > > The size limitations (8K by default, 32K max) are gone with > 7.1. Well, you shouldn't really use 100+ MB sized rows, > because the resulting INSERT already needs to travel from the > frontend, through the parser down into the executor. And on > SELECT the client needs to buffer all the data at once in > memory. Well, you could roll your own client that streams parts of a query from file. Or you can INSERT the results of a user-defined function that reads from a file/socket/URL or just makes up the field contents ;) > But if you really need to do it, swap space is > cheap... What are the performance implications - is it 1.01, 10 or 1000 times slower than accessing the same file from fs for files in the range of typical Office documents (0.2-20M) ? Will updating one non-toasted field in a tuple copy the toasted one as well, or is only the reference copied ? ------------------ Hannu
В списке pgsql-interfaces по дате отправления: