> I'm using Linux and ext2fs has a 2GB limit on files, and it seems like
> 6.5.3 tables are stored as single files, so better not go down that path
:).
I'm using 6.5.2 and it will split a table among several files, so that's not
a problem. Though I'm not sure how BLOBs are stored since I never use them.
I store large text in files mostly because I create full-text indexes using
SWISH++.
--
Adam Ruth
InterCation, Inc.
www.intercation.com
"Lincoln Yeoh" <lylyeoh@mecomb.com> wrote in message
news:3.0.5.32.20000417094047.008e4100@pop.mecomb.po.my...
> Well I'm currently using the file system for large files. However because
> of that I can see a few reasons why people might want to use Postgresql to
> handle them. Others can probably mention more.
>
> Using Pg to handle large stuff makes more consistent overall and it's
> easier for you to handle exceptions - e.g. if things fail the whole thing
> is rolled back, and you theoretically don't get the large files dangling
> around. Well ok you probably do until the next vacuum, but at least you
> don't have to write your own vacuum to handle that ;). Basically you shift
> the problem to Pg (and the very fine developers :) ).
>
> The reasons I decided to go file system were:
> 1) I'm using Linux and ext2fs has a 2GB limit on files, and it seems like
> 6.5.3 tables are stored as single files, so better not go down that path
:).
> 2) I'm using Perl, DBI etc and a brief look at BLOB handling put me off.
> Maybe it was unwarranted, but given 1) I decided to call the whole thing
off.
>
> Cheerio,
>
> Link.
>
>