Kris Jurka wrote:
> That would work, but it's not going to happen. Setting up and using a
> large object is completely different than just stashing data in a bytea
> field. Convincing the server to do simple conversions is difficult
> enough, getting it to do something of this magnitude is out of the
> question.
>
Why? After all, both types represent a sequence of bytes so it's not
really doing a conversion. It's just allowing multiple ways of accessing it.
I'm not sure it would be that much work to actaully make the server
accept both "by value" and "by stream" semantics for both types.
Implemented correctly, all clients (not just JDBC) could benefit.
Regards,
Thomas Hallgren
