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

Re: [INTERFACES] Large objects, why not use the filesystem?

From: Adam Haberlach <haberlaa(at)ricochet(dot)net>
To: Matthew Hagerty <matthew(at)wolfepub(dot)com>, pgsql-interfaces(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] Large objects, why not use the filesystem?
Date: 1999-01-31 20:51:03
Message-ID: 19990131125103.D22196@ricochet.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-interfaces
On Sun, Jan 31, 1999 at 03:26:15PM -0500, Matthew Hagerty wrote:
> Greetings,
> 
> I always see posts of people trying to get their large binary and text
> objects into and out of the database somehow.  I was wondering if there is
> some reason why just storing a filename in the table would be a bad thing?
> This way you can let the file system worry about storing the data (since
> that is what the file system is good at.)  I understand that you probably
> could not access the data via ODBC, but if you are writing your frontend in
> C or Perl, etc. then you would simply use the filename stored in the table
> to access the data.

	Because the database is in a different room then the client.


In response to

pgsql-interfaces by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 1999-01-31 22:41:35
Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] Large objects, why not use the filesystem?
Previous:From: Matthew HagertyDate: 1999-01-31 20:26:15
Subject: Large objects, why not use the filesystem?

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