| From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Estevan Rech <softrech(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com>, Rob Sargent <robjsargent(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-generallists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Best Strategy for Large Number of Images |
| Date: | 2021-12-15 18:57:52 |
| Message-ID: | CAKFQuwaJg+P32BYdZMtNFPhhGQxZc-_34RxW0YpZF4+sWDEtvw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Wednesday, December 15, 2021, Estevan Rech <softrech(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> But PostgreSQL can handle it? Does it have good search performance? and is
> memory usage feasible?
>
Images of that size won’t be stored on the main table so performance when
not asking for image data should be normal. Memory is one of those usage
patterns and hardware “it depends” things. Probably it will be OK.
Personally, it is easier, and less complex, than the alternative. Do it
and migrate later if issues arise.
David J.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Estevan Rech | 2021-12-15 19:22:25 | Re: Best Strategy for Large Number of Images |
| Previous Message | Adrian Klaver | 2021-12-15 18:52:53 | Re: Best Strategy for Large Number of Images |