Thread: large object max size

On 10/11/2012 11:52 PM, pramodh reddy wrote:
> What is the maximum size of large object supported by the latest JDBC
> driver ?

I haven't explicitly tested, but there's no reason to expect it's any
different from PostgreSQL's own maximums.

That said, I wouldn't personally use large objects anywhere near the
maximum. The performance won't be great, and it's a pain for backup and
restore.

--
Craig Ringer

I've used 300MB objects, no problem. The only limit is java max
memory, the object load uses around 1.5 times the object size, at
least on ASCII transfers, I'm not sure if binary transfers are already
default.

Luis Flores

On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 5:33 AM, Craig Ringer <ringerc@ringerc.id.au> wrote:
> On 10/11/2012 11:52 PM, pramodh reddy wrote:
>>
>> What is the maximum size of large object supported by the latest JDBC
>> driver ?
>
>
> I haven't explicitly tested, but there's no reason to expect it's any
> different from PostgreSQL's own maximums.
>
> That said, I wouldn't personally use large objects anywhere near the
> maximum. The performance won't be great, and it's a pain for backup and
> restore.
>
> --
> Craig Ringer
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-jdbc mailing list (pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-jdbc

Hi,

it depends. If you access blobs via byte[] (i think) the limit is at 1GB
We use streams with lo module in one project and have some entries with
more than 4GB in access with a java runtime with less than 2GB memory.
Works as expected.

best regards
Thomas

On 11.10.2012 17:52, pramodh reddy wrote:
> What is the maximum size of large object supported by the latest JDBC
> driver ?
> Regards,
> Pramodh