Re: Large Objects

From: dyp <dyp(at)perchine(dot)com>
To: "Steven Lacroix" <lacroix(at)newwaveindustries(dot)com>
Cc: "Postgres Mailing List" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Large Objects
Date: 2000-09-20 04:28:26
Message-ID: 159478295.20000920082826@perchine.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Hello Steven,

Tuesday, September 19, 2000, 11:00:02 PM, you wrote:

SL> A couple of questions and concerns about Blobs.

SL> I'm wondering what kind of performance hits do BLOBS have on a database
SL> large database.

SL> Currently working on implementing a database with images. I guess i'm
SL> looking for some numbers showing the performence. Note that it would be
SL> for web database project.

It hardly depends on the amount of objects you have.
In current LO implementation there is really huge drawback.
It creates 2 files for each LO. When you have > 10000 LOs you are
lost.

There was a patch made by me to provide LO support inside one table.

Without this patch I had approximatly 30 minutes to insert 10000 LOs.
With it it was only 5 min neccessary.

Also you should understand that all measures hardly depends on the
size of the LOs you will have. It would be easier for you just write
some small test cases on the random data and measure them.

--
Best regards,
dyp mailto:dyp(at)perchine(dot)com

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Lockhart 2000-09-20 05:40:02 Re: nasty problem with redhat 6.2 + pg 7.02
Previous Message Tom Lane 2000-09-20 04:20:00 Re: Proposal for new PL/Perl README