Rick James wrote:
Instead I broke blobs into pieces, inserting them with a sequence number.
Understanding the underlying problem, that still seems like an
unnatural way to store pictures and documents.
Added benefit: Does not clog up replication while huge single-insert is
being copied over network and reexecuted on slaves.
The design of blobs that Jim did at DEC included the ability to send
them across the network in chunks of a client specified size. In 1982
it was quite common to have blobs that were larger than physical memory.
What he did more recently was add a "blob repository" separate from the
active tablespace that allowed the backup function to skip unchanged
blobs while backing up active data. It also allows replicants to share
a single copy of blobs, if appropriate.
There are lots of ways of making large blobs work better in relational
databases.
Regards,
Ann
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
