Re: Extending varlena - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: Extending varlena
Date
Msg-id 200808191211.52799.peter_e@gmx.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Extending varlena  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Extending varlena  ("Stephen R. van den Berg" <srb@cuci.nl>)
List pgsql-hackers
Am Monday, 18. August 2008 schrieb Tom Lane:
> - permissions features (more than "none" anyway)
> - better management of orphaned objects (obsoleting vacuumlo)
> - support > 16TB of large objects (maybe partition pg_largeobject?)
> - dump and restore probably need improvement to be practical for such
>   large data volumes

If you replace the third point by "maybe partition TOAST tables", replace 
large object handle by TOAST pointer, and create an API to work on TOAST 
pointers, how are the two so much different?  And why should they be?  I can 
see that there are going to be needs to access large data with interfaces 
that are not traditional SQL, but at least the storage handling could be the 
same.  That way you would solve the first two points and others for free.


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: possible minor EXPLAIN bug?
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: Overhauling GUCS