| From: | Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | oliver_schmidt_(at)hotmail(dot)de, pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Further clarification in documentation: No deletion of unreferenced large objects |
| Date: | 2023-06-12 16:48:54 |
| Message-ID: | 5d0349511403954daf7578bdab2271a55ddb3395.camel@cybertec.at |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs |
On Mon, 2023-06-12 at 13:48 +0000, PG Doc comments form wrote:
> Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/15/datatype-binary.html
>
> When deleting a row that references (contains) a large object, I think that
> most users expect the DBMS to take care of the, now unreferenced, BLOB. It's
> good to know that PostgreSQL handles this differently and that one must
> periodically use vacuumlo to avoid BLOB data piling up. At least, that's
> what I understood.
>
> I think a small paragraph in the documentation about this would help many
> people. I can help with writing, if needed.
This is documented here:
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/lo.html
Admittedly, that is not the best place. Perhaps the introductory chapter
in https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/lo-intro.html would be a good
place to mention that there is no referential integrity to large objects.
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Oliver Marienfeld | 2023-06-13 10:57:24 | Re: Further clarification in documentation: No deletion of unreferenced large objects |
| Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2023-06-12 16:11:32 | Re: Further clarification in documentation: No deletion of unreferenced large objects |