From: Aleksey Demakov <avd@gcom.ru>
To: Peter T Mount <peter@retep.org.uk>
Cc: pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] large objects
Date: 27 Jul 1998 18:55:22 +0700
Message-ID: <86d8arld91.fsf@avd.gcom.ru> (raw)
References: <Pine.LNX.3.96.980727104640.934F-100000@maidast.retep.org.uk>
Peter T Mount <peter@retep.org.uk> writes:
>
> The object is stored using a table/index pair, and takes up more disk
> space than a single object.
>
How much more? And what about performance?
In fact I don't need very large objects. 64k or even 32k will suffice.
Could such not-so-large objects be implemented more effectively? It would
be very nice to have a new postgres type for this. The 8k limit is very
restrictive. What do postgres gurus think?
Aleksey
--
Aleksey Demakov
avd@gcom.ru
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org
Cc: avd@gcom.ru, peter@retep.org.uk
Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] large objects
In-Reply-To: <86d8arld91.fsf@avd.gcom.ru>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox