Re: To BLOB Or Not To BLOB
От | Adam Ruth |
---|---|
Тема | Re: To BLOB Or Not To BLOB |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 8df52j$uur$1@news.aros.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: To BLOB Or Not To BLOB (Lincoln Yeoh <lylyeoh@mecomb.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: To BLOB Or Not To BLOB
|
Список | pgsql-general |
> I'm using Linux and ext2fs has a 2GB limit on files, and it seems like > 6.5.3 tables are stored as single files, so better not go down that path :). I'm using 6.5.2 and it will split a table among several files, so that's not a problem. Though I'm not sure how BLOBs are stored since I never use them. I store large text in files mostly because I create full-text indexes using SWISH++. -- Adam Ruth InterCation, Inc. www.intercation.com "Lincoln Yeoh" <lylyeoh@mecomb.com> wrote in message news:3.0.5.32.20000417094047.008e4100@pop.mecomb.po.my... > Well I'm currently using the file system for large files. However because > of that I can see a few reasons why people might want to use Postgresql to > handle them. Others can probably mention more. > > Using Pg to handle large stuff makes more consistent overall and it's > easier for you to handle exceptions - e.g. if things fail the whole thing > is rolled back, and you theoretically don't get the large files dangling > around. Well ok you probably do until the next vacuum, but at least you > don't have to write your own vacuum to handle that ;). Basically you shift > the problem to Pg (and the very fine developers :) ). > > The reasons I decided to go file system were: > 1) I'm using Linux and ext2fs has a 2GB limit on files, and it seems like > 6.5.3 tables are stored as single files, so better not go down that path :). > 2) I'm using Perl, DBI etc and a brief look at BLOB handling put me off. > Maybe it was unwarranted, but given 1) I decided to call the whole thing off. > > Cheerio, > > Link. > >
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: