Re: Binary data in PostgreSQL

bytea's suck for large data. I think my processes ate up 5x the size of
the large objects just trying to select them from the database. Anything
over 10 Meg it usually isn't useful for.

Jon

On Sat, 21 Feb 2004, Joshua Drake wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I would use large objects. Easy to access, easy to use.
>
> J
>
>
> Gavin M. Roy wrote:
> > It's not the most effective use of space, and I'm sure not the best way
> > to do it, but I store such data as base64 encoded text. Works very
> > well for my needs, in that regard.
> >
> > Gavin
> >
> > Holger Marzen wrote:
> >
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> AFAIK it is possible for columns to be very large, up to about 2 GB. Are
> >> there any hints or experiences about storing binary data (jpg-images,
> >> pdf-documents) in PostgrreSQL with or without the complicated lo-stuff?
> >>
> >> Of course it's in many cases a good approach to store those files simply
> >> in the file system but there's always a risk of running out of sync
> >> (filesystem and tables), e.g. by deleting files and not deleting the
> >> table rows with the filenames.
> >>
> >> Any ideas and comments welcome.
> >>
> >> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> >> TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> > TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
>
>