Re: bytea or large objects?
От | Joshua D. Drake |
---|---|
Тема | Re: bytea or large objects? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 430F4455.60502@commandprompt.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: bytea or large objects? (Peter Wilson <petew@yellowhawk.co.uk>) |
Ответы |
Re: bytea or large objects?
|
Список | pgsql-general |
> I've just re-written our Whitebeam code to drop large-objects in favour > of BYTEA fields. > > All the old problems of large objects in backups exist, but the killer > for us was that none of the current replication systems, at least that I > could find, would replicate large objects. This became a mandatory > requirements for us. Mammoth Replicator has always replicated Large Objects. The only "backup" issue to large objects is that you have to pass a separate flag and use the custom or tar format to dump them. Bytea has its own issues mostly based around memory usage. I am not saying you should or shouldn't switch as it really depends on your needs but the information above just isn't quite accurate. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake > > I'd have to have a *very* good reason to use large objects over BYTEA now. > > Pete > -- > http://www.whitebeam.org > http://www.yellowhawk.co.uk > ----- > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings -- Your PostgreSQL solutions company - Command Prompt, Inc. 1.800.492.2240 PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Programming, 24x7 support Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting Co-Authors: plPHP, plPerlNG - http://www.commandprompt.com/
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: