Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 10:04:45 +0200 (EET)
From: Achilleus Mantzios <achill@matrix.gatewaynet.com>
To: Dennis Sacks <dennis@illusions.com>
Cc: Sam Adams <samadams@myfastmail.com>, <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: BLOBs vs BYTEA
In-Reply-To: <41FEFCAA.5070603@illusions.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0502011002430.32497-100000@matrix.gatewaynet.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-7
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT

O Dennis Sacks έγραψε στις Jan 31, 2005 :

> Sam Adams wrote:
> 
> >Anyway, I was wondering which would be a better way to store a large
> >amount of files each a few megabytes in size. There could be hundreds of
> >thousands of files altogether. If stored as BYTEAs this would put them
> >all in a single table. Would this effect performance considerablely? I
> >assume if there were thousands then it would. But if the data is stored
> >as BLOBs then aren't they store inside the database just in another
> >table? Wouldn't this also be undesirable. Would it be better to store
> >them normally on the file system and just provide the path and file name
> >in the database. Obviously this wont provide any security or backup but
> >would it make sense to do it this way with such a large amount of data?
> >  
> >
> This is one of those age old debates. I've done both, and I'll tell you 
> that in my experience it is less of a headache to store the files in the 
> filesystem (which is what filesystems are designed for) and store the 
> metadata in the database.

I think if you are doing replication or write in java,
you'll be much happier with bytea.

> 
> Dennis Sacks
> dennis@illusions.com
> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
>       subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
>       message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
> 

-- 
-Achilleus