Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: BYTEA or LO?

From: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Jean-Yves F(dot) Barbier" <12ukwn(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "ktm(at)rice(dot)edu" <ktm(at)rice(dot)edu>, pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: BYTEA or LO?
Date: 2011-05-31 19:21:17
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-novice
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Jean-Yves F. Barbier <12ukwn(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, 31 May 2011 13:40:02 -0500, "ktm(at)rice(dot)edu" <ktm(at)rice(dot)edu> wrote:
> ...
>> That is needed to use the non-binary API. You can also use hex encoding
>> starting with 9.0, I think. The data is stored in binary internally so you
>> should not get a 33% bump in size. If you use the binary API, you can avoid
>> the hex/base64 encoding pass as well.
> I just read the doc but didn't fully understand the binary part.
> Do you mean that with BYTEA binary type I can directly R/W my pictures
> without any transcoding trick?

If you are using libpq or another driver that exports this feature of
the protocol, yes.


In response to


pgsql-novice by date

Next:From: Jean-Yves F. BarbierDate: 2011-05-31 19:53:04
Subject: Re: BYTEA or LO?
Previous:From: Jean-Yves F. BarbierDate: 2011-05-31 19:01:26
Subject: Re: BYTEA or LO?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group