On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 11:31:45AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> writes:
> > On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 05:18:51PM +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> >> MED is management of external data, whereas the large objects are
> >> internal, no?
> > It depends on your definition. The lo interface is pretty much to
> > objects on the file system directly.
> LO's are transaction-controlled, and they're not (readily)
> accessible from outside the database. Seems rather completely
> different from regular filesystem files.
Not according to SQL/MED.
> (In any case, there wasn't anything I liked about SQL/MED's ideas
> about external files, so I'm not in favor of modeling LO management
> after that.)
Good point ;)
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com
Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Brendan Jurd||Date: 2009-06-22 17:16:08|
|Subject: Re: BUG #4862: different results in to_date() between 8.3.7 & 8.4.RC1|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2009-06-22 17:00:04|
|Subject: Re: 8.4 open item: copy performance regression? |