| From: | Rodrigo Madera <rodrigo(dot)madera(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Nörder-Tuitje, Marcus <noerder-tuitje(at)technology(dot)de> |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Inefficient escape codes. |
| Date: | 2005-10-21 16:59:30 |
| Message-ID: | 3cf983d0510210959y32fdb891gff11bfbaf1943ebe@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
> I guess, You should check, if a blob field and large object access is
> suitable for you - no escaping etc, just raw binary large objects.
>
> AFAIK, PQExecParams is not the right solution for You. Refer the "Large
> object" section:
>
> "28.3.5. Writing Data to a Large Object
> The function
> int lo_write(PGconn *conn, int fd, const char *buf, size_t len);writes len
> bytes from buf to large object descriptor fd. The fd argument must have been
> returned by a previous lo_open. The number of bytes actually written is
> returned. In the event of an error, the return value is negative."
Well, I read that large objects are kept in only ONE table. No matter what,
only the LOID would be kept. I can't affor that since I hav lots of tables
(using the image-album-app analogy, imagine that we have pictures from
several cities, each one corresponding to a city, like Memphis_Photos,
Chicago_Photos, etc.).
This is one major drawback, isn't it?
Rodrigo
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rodrigo Madera | 2005-10-21 17:15:58 | Re: Inefficient escape codes. |
| Previous Message | Michael Fuhr | 2005-10-21 15:59:43 | Re: What gets cached? |