jws wrote:
> Do the images take up a certain percentage more space due to the on-
> disk format when stored this way?
Bytes are pretty much stored just as bytes, with four bytes of overhead
for the length field. Larger values (> 2kB) are stored out of line, so
there really shouldn't be much concern about storing the image data in
the database. It's probably more of a question what makes your
processing easier.
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
