Re: [HACKERS] Priorities for 6.6 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Vince Vielhaber
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Priorities for 6.6
Date
Msg-id XFMail.990604114906.vev@michvhf.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Priorities for 6.6  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Priorities for 6.6  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 04-Jun-99 Tom Lane wrote:
> However, I am loathe to put *any* work into improving LOs, since I think
> the right answer is to get rid of the need for the durn things by
> eliminating the size restrictions on regular tuples.

Is this doable?  I just looked at the list of datatypes and didn't see
binary as one of them.  Imagining a Real Estate database with pictures
of homes (inside and out), etc. or an employee database with mugshots of
the employees, what datatype would you use to store the pictures (short 
of just storing a filename of the pic)?

Vince.
-- 
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH   email: vev@michvhf.com   flame-mail: /dev/null      # include <std/disclaimers.h>
       TEAM-OS2       Online Campground Directory    http://www.camping-usa.com      Online Giftshop Superstore
http://www.cloudninegifts.com
==========================================================================




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Priorities for 6.6
Next
From: Thomas Lockhart
Date:
Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] 'pgsql/doc/src/sgml/ref lock.sgml set.sgml'