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

Re: Large objects in one table patch

From: Denis Perchine <dyp(at)perchine(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Large objects in one table patch
Date: 2000-10-11 04:27:43
Message-ID: 00101111274323.02713@dyp.perchine.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches
> Now that we have TOAST, I wonder if we should just build large objects
> on top of that, rather than have all large objects in one file.

Here the question is in speed. What will be faster? But I better would rely on Jan's opinion about this.

BTW, I ported a patch to the current CVS... And it does not work... Will need 
some time to figure out what's wrong.

> > Hello all,
> >
> > As promised.
> > Here is the patch for large objects in one table.
> > There's new system  table pg_largeobject.
> > create table pg_largeobject (
> >   loid Oid,
> >   pageno int4,
> >   data bytea
> > );
> >
> > It has 2 indices: on (loid) and on (loid,pageno). (Is it neccessary to
> > have both? Can I search on the second one for loid only?)
> >
> > BLOB is divided by virtual pages, which is maximum tuple size - some
> > internal data. Access to the data is based on pageno, which is similar
> > block number on FS.
> >
> > I am not sure that it is optimized and have no memory/resource leaks.
> > Could please someone better familiar with postgres review the patch.
> >
> > It perfectly works with my database.
> >
> > Patch is against the latest CVS.
> >
> > --
> > Sincerely Yours,
> > Denis Perchine
> >
> > ----------------------------------
> > E-Mail: dyp(at)perchine(dot)com
> > HomePage: http://www.perchine.com/dyp/
> > FidoNet: 2:5000/120.5
> > ----------------------------------
>
> [ Attachment, skipping... ]

-- 
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

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Christof PetigDate: 2000-10-11 06:54:29
Subject: Re: Small patch to replace 'idle' by 'trans' if transaction is still open
Previous:From: Alfred PerlsteinDate: 2000-10-11 01:48:54
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCHES] PostgreSQL virtual hosting support

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