From: | Luis Flores <luiscamposflores(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Craig Ringer <ringerc(at)ringerc(dot)id(dot)au> |
Cc: | pramodh reddy <pramodh(dot)mereddy(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: large object max size |
Date: | 2012-10-14 08:22:00 |
Message-ID: | CA+nXnG9wZR+240K4r41=_GEjVtcqA-8nGNxyN_o9iyQoyNOENw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-jdbc |
I've used 300MB objects, no problem. The only limit is java max
memory, the object load uses around 1.5 times the object size, at
least on ASCII transfers, I'm not sure if binary transfers are already
default.
Luis Flores
On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 5:33 AM, Craig Ringer <ringerc(at)ringerc(dot)id(dot)au> wrote:
> On 10/11/2012 11:52 PM, pramodh reddy wrote:
>>
>> What is the maximum size of large object supported by the latest JDBC
>> driver ?
>
>
> I haven't explicitly tested, but there's no reason to expect it's any
> different from PostgreSQL's own maximums.
>
> That said, I wouldn't personally use large objects anywhere near the
> maximum. The performance won't be great, and it's a pain for backup and
> restore.
>
> --
> Craig Ringer
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-jdbc mailing list (pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-jdbc
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | dmp | 2012-10-14 16:40:25 | Re: drop in performance using jdbc driver version 9 |
Previous Message | Craig Ringer | 2012-10-14 04:33:31 | Re: large object max size |