| From: | Jonathan Bartlett <johnnyb(at)eskimo(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeff Eckermann <jeff_eckermann(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Edwin Quijada <listas_quijada(at)hotmail(dot)com>, <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Picture with Postgres and Delphi |
| Date: | 2003-09-10 02:56:45 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.GSU.4.44.0309091953370.11193-100000@eskimo.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
> For the education of me and maybe others too, why was
> that? i.e. what problems did you run into, that bytea avoids?
>
Compared to the filesystem, bytea provides data integrity.
Bytea gives you remote access, which you can cache if needed.
Bytea gives you the same permissions as anything else in Postgres, so you
don't have to worry about that separately.
Compared to BLOBs, bytea's are just simpler. You can select them with a
single statement, you don't have to worry about leaving unreferenced
BLOBs, and, after 4 billion inserts, byteas are still meaningful while
BLOBs might not be. (due to OID problems).
Jon
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
> http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruno Wolff III | 2003-09-10 03:28:00 | Re: How to convert a UnixTimestamp to a PostgreSQL date without using ::abstime ? |
| Previous Message | expect | 2003-09-10 02:33:10 | SUMMARY mysql -> psql |