From: | Vince Vielhaber <vev(at)michvhf(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Priorities for 6.6 |
Date: | 1999-06-04 15:49:06 |
Message-ID: | XFMail.990604114906.vev@michvhf.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 04-Jun-99 Tom Lane wrote:
> However, I am loathe to put *any* work into improving LOs, since I think
> the right answer is to get rid of the need for the durn things by
> eliminating the size restrictions on regular tuples.
Is this doable? I just looked at the list of datatypes and didn't see
binary as one of them. Imagining a Real Estate database with pictures
of homes (inside and out), etc. or an employee database with mugshots of
the employees, what datatype would you use to store the pictures (short
of just storing a filename of the pic)?
Vince.
--
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: vev(at)michvhf(dot)com flame-mail: /dev/null
# include <std/disclaimers.h> TEAM-OS2
Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
==========================================================================
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thomas Lockhart | 1999-06-04 16:01:30 | Re: [COMMITTERS] 'pgsql/doc/src/sgml/ref lock.sgml set.sgml' |
Previous Message | Hub.Org News Admin | 1999-06-04 15:35:30 |