Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Patch for better large objects support

From: Denis Perchine <dyp(at)perchine(dot)com>
To: Chris Bitmead <chris(at)bitmead(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Patch for better large objects support
Date: 2000-06-13 08:51:08
Message-ID: 00061315544706.00525@dyp (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches
> > > Will anybody want to use this when TOAST comes to be?
> > 
> > 1. There's no any TOAST at the moment.
> 
> I wasn't implying the patch is bad. Only wondering out load if toast
> will be a super-set of large objects.

Not exactly.
 
> > 2. For really large objects TOAST will be really inefficient for quite small < 64K other
> > way around.
> 
> Why will toast be inefficient for really large objects?

Because data is stored in relations, and there's extra overhead for managing them.
Just look on Jan's mail in [HACKERS] for better description of the difference.

-- 
Sincerely Yours,
Denis Perchine

----------------------------------
E-Mail: dyp(at)perchine(dot)com
HomePage: http://www.perchine.com/dyp/
FidoNet: 2:5000/120.5
----------------------------------

In response to

Responses

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2000-06-13 09:05:53
Subject: Big 7.1 open items
Previous:From: Chris BitmeadDate: 2000-06-13 08:45:27
Subject: Re: Patch for better large objects support

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group