Re: Large object insert performance.

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Haight <peterh(at)sapros(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Large object insert performance.
Date: 2000-08-24 04:18:41
Message-ID: 23076.967090721@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Peter Haight <peterh(at)sapros(dot)com> writes:
> All I'm doing is inserting the large objects.

How many LOs are we talking about here?

The current LO implementation creates a separate table, with index,
for each LO. That means two files in the database directory per LO.
On most Unix filesystems I've dealt with, performance will go to hell
in a handbasket for more than a few thousand files in one directory.

Denis Perchine did a reimplementation of LOs to store 'em in a single
table. This hasn't been checked or applied to current sources yet,
but if you're feeling adventurous see the pgsql-patches archives from
late June.

> Is there any way to speed this up? If the handling of large objects is this
> bad, I think I might just store these guys on the file system.

You could do that too, if you don't need transactional semantics for
large-object operations.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message anuj 2000-08-24 04:30:34 FW: Count & Distinct
Previous Message Tom Lane 2000-08-24 03:43:45 Re: Count & Distinct