Received: from golem.jpl.nasa.gov (IDENT:root@hectic-1.jpl.nasa.gov
	[128.149.68.203]) by hub.org (8.9.2/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA94332
	for <pgsql-interfaces@postgreSQL.org>;
	Mon, 1 Feb 1999 08:25:37 -0500 (EST)
	(envelope-from lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu)
Received: from alumni.caltech.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by golem.jpl.nasa.gov (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA12788;
	Mon, 1 Feb 1999 13:26:09 GMT
Sender: tgl@mythos.jpl.nasa.gov
Message-ID: <36B5AB71.ACBA1716@alumni.caltech.edu>
Date: Mon, 01 Feb 1999 13:26:09 +0000
From: "Thomas G. Lockhart" <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu>
Organization: Caltech/JPL
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.07 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.0.30 i686)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Gregory W Burnham <gburnham@sfu.ca>
CC: pgsql-interfaces@postgreSQL.org
Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] Large objects, why not use the filesystem?
References: <00cc01be4dda$9660fb20$8d0835d1@bconnected.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> Ok, I've seen all the xinv* files, I understand that.  But what
> if the benefit of using large objects over files?  If there isn't
> superior performance then why do it?

To provide a consistant access interface in a client-server environment.
Managing one interface is usually easier than managing several (e.g.
postgres, html, ftp, ...) to support a single app. 

I would expect the performance of LOs to be somewhat worse than direct
file system access to the same data, for a variety of reasons. But for
many applications that performance difference is not a critical issue.

                      - Tom