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

newbie question: bytea v. large objects

From: David Saracini <dsaracini(at)yahoo(dot)com>
To: pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: newbie question: bytea v. large objects
Date: 2009-04-15 01:58:06
Message-ID: 791265.5432.qm@web82904.mail.mud.yahoo.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-novice
Hello all,

I've been doing a little bit of reading on the difference between large objects and bytea.  Bytea feels a little bit more like what I'm use to with Oracle, MSSQL, etc.  However, I'm leaning towards using large objects, but one thing in the documentation is bothering me:

>From documentation:

( http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/interactive/lo-intro.html )

"PostgreSQL also supports a storage system called "TOAST" that automatically stores values larger than a single database page into a secondary storage area per table. This makes the large object facility partially obsolete."

I think it's the word "obsolete" that is bothering me :) 

Does anyone know if I should consider large objects to be depreciated, and if there are plans for them to someday go away?

Any other advice on the subject or links to reading I should do will be much appreciated.

Thanks,

David

pgsql-novice by date

Next:From: Jasen BettsDate: 2009-04-19 11:08:47
Subject: Re: Time-based trigger/procedure
Previous:From: Just E. MailDate: 2009-04-14 12:04:08
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL 8.3.7 Clint to Server Connection Problem!

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