Received: from relay.gcom.ru (Garant-Siberia-RadioNET.gcom.ru [194.84.180.33]
	(may be forged)) by hub.org (8.8.8/8.7.5) with ESMTP id
	DAA02433 for <pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org>;
	Mon, 27 Jul 1998 03:13:56 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from uucp@localhost) by relay.gcom.ru (8.6.10/8.6.10) id OAA20514
	for <pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org>;
	Mon, 27 Jul 1998 14:13:53 +0700
Received: from avd.gcom.ru(194.84.180.56), claiming to be "avd.garsib.ru"
	via SMTP by Garant-Siberia-RadioNET.gcom.ru, id smtpd020512;
	Mon Jul 27 14:13:45 1998
Received: (from avd@localhost) by avd.garsib.ru (8.8.7/8.8.7) id OAA01143;
	Mon, 27 Jul 1998 14:21:15 +0700 (NSS) (envelope-from avd)
Sender: avd@avd.garsib.ru
To: pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org
Subject: large objects
From: Aleksey Demakov <avd@gcom.ru>
Date: 27 Jul 1998 14:21:14 +0700
Message-ID: <86vhojvjx1.fsf@avd.garsib.ru>
Lines: 14
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.3/Emacs 19.34


I'm working on a project where there is a need to store large texts in
a database. I thought that postgres' large object are good for this.
But one my fellow said me that current large object implementation is
very unefficient. So having, say, several thousands of large objects
is impractical. Is this true?

Thanks in advance

Aleksey

-- 
Aleksey Demakov
avd@gcom.ru