Re: [INTERFACES] Large objects, why not use the filesystem?
От | Gregory W Burnham |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [INTERFACES] Large objects, why not use the filesystem? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 001f01be4de6$b7757e60$8d0835d1@bconnected.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответы |
Re: [INTERFACES] Large objects, why not use the filesystem?
|
Список | pgsql-interfaces |
----- Original Message ----- From: Thomas G. Lockhart <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu> To: Gregory W Burnham <gburnham@sfu.ca> Cc: <pgsql-interfaces@postgreSQL.org> Sent: Monday, February 01, 1999 5:26 AM Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] Large objects, why not use the filesystem? >> 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. 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? >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. 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? 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)
В списке pgsql-interfaces по дате отправления: