> I then proceeded with implementing my own block-oriented data table
> using bytea for storage. This approach has been more flexible but has a
> couple of draw-backs:
> 1. To partially update a bytea field, I have to load it first,
> resulting in the overhead of an extra query.
> 2. There is more overhead from the extra queries required to manage
> the block table. The result is a large CPU hit for simple I/O.
I'm sure there's quite a few people who'd be very delighted
if you chose to implement range-update/append support for bytea !
GPG key ID E4071346 @ wwwkeys.pgp.net
E167 67FD A291 2BEA 73BD 4537 78B9 A9F9 E407 1346
In response to
pgsql-general by date
|Next:||From: Joshua D. Drake||Date: 2004-11-28 18:26:44|
|Subject: Re: XUL and mozilla/firefox SQL extension|
|Previous:||From: Net Virtual Mailing Lists||Date: 2004-11-28 10:01:25|
|Subject: Re: Why the current setup of pgsql.* and|