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

Re: Storing Binary Large Objects

From: Rich Shepard <rshepard(at)appl-ecosys(dot)com>
To: pdxpug(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Storing Binary Large Objects
Date: 2007-03-29 13:16:00
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pdxpug
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007, David E. Wheeler wrote:

> I think I'd use the bytea type for files that are relatively small?say up
> to 256K or something, and maybe smaller. Otherwise I'd use the lo_*
> functions (although they are rather a PITA). How big are these PDFs you
> need to manage?


   They're large: 2-7M for most. They're all the operating permits scanned as
pdf files. For one project site I have 42M worth so far.

   While paper copies need to be available at the mines and mills, a central
repository for the digital copies is also required for efficient compliance

   This need is new to me so I'm open to any and all suggestions on how to
handle these within the database structure. If it's more efficient to store
them in a separate directory on the server and provide pointers within the
database table, then that's the way we'll go.



Richard B. Shepard, Ph.D.               |    The Environmental Permitting
Applied Ecosystem Services, Inc.        |          Accelerator(TM)
<>     Voice: 503-667-4517      Fax: 503-667-8863

In response to


pdxpug by date

Next:From: Rich ShepardDate: 2007-03-29 13:37:55
Subject: Re: Storing Binary Large Objects
Previous:From: David E. WheelerDate: 2007-03-29 03:54:49
Subject: Re: Storing Binary Large Objects

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