Re: Storing images in PostgreSQL databases (again)

"Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> ... postgresql will toast all images over a cerain size which
> is actually pretty efficient although can be a problem if your images
> are really big.

But any reasonable image format is compressed already (or at least, if
you are using an uncompressed format while worried about disk space then
you need some time at image processing boot camp). TOAST isn't going to
accomplish anything.

I think the arguments for keeping stuff inside the database are
(a) far easier to maintain transactional semantics for insert/delete,
and (b) easier to serve the data out to clients that aren't on the same
machine. You aren't going to find a performance win though.

regards, tom lane