Re: Caching Websites

From: Doug McNaught <doug(at)mcnaught(dot)org>
To: Adam Kessel <adam(at)bostoncoop(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Caching Websites
Date: 2003-05-12 13:58:31
Message-ID: m3of28i7w8.fsf@varsoon.wireboard.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Adam Kessel <adam(at)bostoncoop(dot)net> writes:

> Based on the documetation, I don't immediately see any disadvantage to
> using these large objects--does anyone else see why I might not want to
> store archived websites in large objects?

It's going to be (probably) a little slower than the filesystem
solution, and backups are a little more involved (you can't use
pg_dumpall) but everything works--I have been using LOs with success
for a couple years now.

-Doug

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jon Earle 2003-05-12 14:19:58 Re: Error installing postgresql-7.3.2 (fixed, but Q
Previous Message Adam Sherman 2003-05-12 13:57:12 Performance Problem