| From: | Frank Joerdens <frank(at)joerdens(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Cc: | hank(at)fas-art(dot)com, adam(at)archi-me-des(dot)de |
| Subject: | Bytea vs. BLOB (what's the motivation behind the former?) |
| Date: | 2002-03-28 11:33:21 |
| Message-ID: | 20020328123321.C10687@superfly.archi-me-des.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Leading up to 7.2 there was quite some noise on both pgsql-general and
hackers regarding the new bytea type. It *appears* that this is now the
recommended choice for binary data over BLOBs. I didn't manage to dig up
an explanation though why bytea would be better than BLOB - besides that
the interface to deal with large objects is somewhat more convoluted.
Is this all about the cleaner interface? I also saw that bytea is a
proprietary Postgres type, a replacement(?) for the SQL99 BLOB type.
Does this mean that bytea will eventually supersede the BLOB type in
Postgres? Is bytea faster?
This probably has all been explained before somewhere but I dug through the
archives till about mid-2001 and couldn't find a clear explanation.
Regards, Frank
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Oliver Elphick | 2002-03-28 14:12:57 | Multibyte problem with COPY FROM [Fwd: Re: postgres 7.2 and unicode] |
| Previous Message | Medi Montaseri | 2002-03-28 07:21:01 | An Invoicing db design, how would you do it |