Re: Patch for better large objects support

From: Denis Perchine <dyp(at)perchine(dot)com>
To: Chris Bitmead <chris(at)bitmead(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Patch for better large objects support
Date: 2000-06-13 08:51:08
Message-ID: 00061315544706.00525@dyp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

> > > Will anybody want to use this when TOAST comes to be?
> >
> > 1. There's no any TOAST at the moment.
>
> I wasn't implying the patch is bad. Only wondering out load if toast
> will be a super-set of large objects.

Not exactly.

> > 2. For really large objects TOAST will be really inefficient for quite small < 64K other
> > way around.
>
> Why will toast be inefficient for really large objects?

Because data is stored in relations, and there's extra overhead for managing them.
Just look on Jan's mail in [HACKERS] for better description of the difference.

--
Sincerely Yours,
Denis Perchine

----------------------------------
E-Mail: dyp(at)perchine(dot)com
HomePage: http://www.perchine.com/dyp/
FidoNet: 2:5000/120.5
----------------------------------

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2000-06-13 09:05:53 Big 7.1 open items
Previous Message Chris Bitmead 2000-06-13 08:45:27 Re: Patch for better large objects support