Re: pg_largeobject

Some time ago I had to setup a replicated file system between multiple linux servers. I tried everything I could based on postgres, including large objects, but everything was significantly slower than a regular filesystem.

My conclussion: postgres is not suitable for storing large files efficiently.

Do you need that for replication, or just for file storage?

Alvaro Aguayo
Jefe de Operaciones
Open Comb Systems E.I.R.L.

Oficina: (+51-1) 3377813 | RPM: #034252 / (+51) 995540103  | RPC: (+51) 954183248
Website: www.ocs.pe

Sent from my Sony Xperia™ smartphone

---- Sridhar N Bamandlapally wrote ----

all media files are stored in database with size varies from 1MB - 5GB

based on media file types and user-group we storing in different tables, but PostgreSQL store OID/Large-object in single table (pg_largeobject), 90% of database size is with table pg_largeobject

due to size limitation BYTEA was not considered

Thanks

Sridhar

On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 3:05 PM, John R Pierce <pierce@hogranch.com> wrote:

On 3/29/2016 2:13 AM, Sridhar N Bamandlapally wrote:

Hi

pg_largeobject is creating performance issues as it grow due to single point storage(for all tables)

is there any alternate apart from bytea ?

like configuration large-object-table at table-column level and oid PK(primary key) stored at pg_largeobject

I would as soon use a NFS file store for larger files like images, audio, videos, or whatever.   use SQL for the relational metadata.

just sayin'....



--
john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz



--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general