From: | Can Burak Cilingir <canburak(at)cs(dot)bilgi(dot)edu(dot)tr> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org> |
Cc: | pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: checksumming data |
Date: | 2005-01-04 08:26:26 |
Message-ID: | 1104827186.8632.9.camel@portable.canb.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-novice |
On Mon, 2005-01-03 at 18:14 -0700, Michael Fuhr wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 01:04:48AM +0200, Can Burak Cilingir wrote:
>
> > How can I get the sha1 sum of large objects? or md5. but sha1 is better.
> For a digest function that handles binary data and can do SHA1, see
> the contrib/pgcrypto module.
I'll look at that thanks
> find values for constants like INV_READ, so maybe there's an easier
these are very convenient functions for inserting data. i am in love
with these.
> How committed are you to using large objects? You might be able
> to use BYTEA instead, but search the list archives for the debate
> about which is more appropriate for a given situation.
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2002-03/msg01313.php
Each type (bytea and LO) has its own advantages. For instance, bytea
manipulates the entire string in memory (up to 4 copies from what I
understand), which may be a problem if your data is very large (I've
only tried to store 10s of MB in bytea fields myself).
I am storing 60-100MB png's. though i didn't tested if statement above
is true. but i am convenient.
the need for md5summing by the help of database is just curiosity. I am
summing before insert which was enough already.
--
Can Burak Cilingir
http://canb.net/
http://tdk.org.tr/dogruyazalim.html
icq#10720999
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Sean Davis | 2005-01-04 10:52:38 | perl DBI and SQL COPY |
Previous Message | Andreas Kretschmer | 2005-01-04 06:12:11 | Re: [despammed] postgresql for windows |