Re: usage on blobs

From: Joel Rodrigues <joelrodrigues(at)Phreaker(dot)net>
To: pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: usage on blobs
Date: 2003-02-28 09:33:42
Message-ID: B9E6E0AA-4AFF-11D7-8372-0005024EF27F@Phreaker.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-novice


On Friday, February 28, 2003, at 03:09 , Aarni Ruuhimäki wrote:

> Unless you want a HUGE db, consider using link / paths.

Why would (and why should !) this result in a 'HUGE' database ?

I too am just beginning to encounter these issues & came across
similar advice for storing images. To which my answer is that
*if* this is so, that we should store only text in database
tables and we're better off storing binary files in the file
system, then it diminishes (and depending on the application,
defeats) the purpose of using PostgreSQL.

Storing file in the files system could mean a lot of additional,
redundant work.

- Joel

>
> On Thursday 27 February 2003 22:23, you wrote:
>> Hello everyone. I wanted to create a mp3 database and I was
>> woundering
>> should I actually place mp3 binaries with in a database
>> table? Should
>> I just use blobs or links to where the binaries are stored on the file
>> system?

In response to

Browse pgsql-novice by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Christian Stuhldreier 2003-02-28 13:17:04 Synchronisationproblems
Previous Message Derek Glidden 2003-02-28 04:24:43 content-based image retrieval?