| From: | "Mark Wong" <markwkm(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Rich Shepard" <rshepard(at)appl-ecosys(dot)com>, pdxpug(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Storing Binary Large Objects |
| Date: | 2007-03-29 15:35:02 |
| Message-ID: | 70c01d1d0703290835t33696f97g2faf03d5a9e8bd5a@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pdxpug |
On 3/29/07, David E. Wheeler <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mar 29, 2007, at 06:37, Rich Shepard wrote:
>
> > I think we'll keep them on disk, separate from the database, and use
> > pointers to them.
>
> That's what Bricolage does, and as long as your App has access to
> them on the file system (i.e., you don't have an array of app servers
> with their own file systems), it works just fine—especially for a Web
> app, where the Web server can handle actually *serving* the file.
>
> But I would like to see BLOBs become a lot easier to use in
> PostgreSQL...
On paper, using bytea looks more straightforward the oid datatype.
Does bytea have its own difficulties, other than having to find a way
to escape the data?
Mark
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ian Burrell | 2007-03-29 17:37:13 | Re: Storing Binary Large Objects |
| Previous Message | David E. Wheeler | 2007-03-29 15:22:52 | Re: Storing Binary Large Objects |