Message-ID: <002901be4de9$389a2f20$8d0835d1@bconnected.net>
Reply-To: "Gregory W Burnham" <gburnham@sfu.ca>
From: "Gregory W Burnham" <gburnham@sfu.ca>
To: "Herouth Maoz" <herouth@oumail.openu.ac.il>
Cc: <pgsql-interfaces@postgreSQL.org>
Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] Large objects, why not use the filesystem?
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 05:46:03 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Herouth Maoz <herouth@oumail.openu.ac.il>
To: Gregory W Burnham <gburnham@sfu.ca>
Cc: <pgsql-interfaces@postgreSQL.org>
Sent: Monday, February 01, 1999 5:47 AM
Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] Large objects, why not use the filesystem?


>At 15:28 +0200 on 01/02/1999, Gregory W Burnham wrote:
>
>
>> Right, but I'm storing html and gif in my blobs and just
>> writing them out to stdout.  Why shouldn't I just store
>> the file names and put the files right on the server?
>
>No reason at all. If it works for your application, then Buy Nike... oops,
>I meant "Just Do It". There are pros and cons for Blobs. If the pros don't
>hold for you, don't use Blobs.

Right, obviously.  I'd just always assumed that lo_s were more
efficient.  Now one of my beliefs is shot and I'm crushed.  But
don't worry, I'll be ok.

>> To quote a friend of mine, "Efficiency is an issue only when
>> inefficiency is a problem."  But still, you want to be as
>> efficient as possible, right?  In retrospec, it would have
>> been more efficient to store all four digits of the year, right?
>
>Actually, it would simply have postponed the problem to a later date...

We should be using 5 digits, right?

Gregory W Burnham
Software Engineer
Excite Labs
Faculty Of Education
Simon Fraser University
Vancouver, BC, V5A 1S6
604 291 3615 (ph)
604 291 5679 (fx)