From: | "Rodrigo Madera" <rodrigo(dot)madera(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | <Nrder-Tuitje(at)svr1(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, "Marcus" <noerder-tuitje(at)technology(dot)de>, "IMB Recipient 1" <mspop3connector(dot)gfnobrega(at)planae2004(dot)local> |
Cc: | <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Inefficient escape codes. |
Date: | 2005-10-21 17:15:58 |
Message-ID: | 000501c5d663$1a907bb0$7e00a8c0@Planae2004.local |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | 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 | Neil Conway | 2005-10-21 21:44:47 | Re: What gets cached? |
Previous Message | Rodrigo Madera | 2005-10-21 16:59:30 | Re: Inefficient escape codes. |