| From: | "Leonel Nunez" <lnunez(at)enelserver(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Guy Rouillier" <guyr(at)masergy(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Storing images in PostgreSQL databases (again) |
| Date: | 2006-10-05 15:42:43 |
| Message-ID: | 37888.201.155.188.137.1160062963.squirrel@enelserver.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
> "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> ... postgresql will toast all images over a cerain size which
>> is actually pretty efficient although can be a problem if your images
>> are really big.
>
> But any reasonable image format is compressed already (or at least, if
> you are using an uncompressed format while worried about disk space then
> you need some time at image processing boot camp). TOAST isn't going to
> accomplish anything.
>
> I think the arguments for keeping stuff inside the database are
> (a) far easier to maintain transactional semantics for insert/delete,
> and (b) easier to serve the data out to clients that aren't on the same
> machine. You aren't going to find a performance win though.
>
(c) easy to replicate
(d) easy to load balancing
leonel
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Brian J. Erickson | 2006-10-05 15:45:41 | PostgreSQL Database Transfer between machines(again) |
| Previous Message | Scott Ribe | 2006-10-05 15:12:23 | Re: Generating synthetic keys on copy |