Re: [PERFORM] Storing Digital Video

2006-02-11 Thread Jim C. Nasby
On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 04:14:09PM -0700, Jan Peterson wrote: In my experience, you don't want to store this stuff in the database. In general, it will work fine, until you have to VACUUM the pg_largeobject table. Unless you have a very powerful I/O subsystem, this VACUUM will kill your

Re: [PERFORM] Storing Digital Video

2006-02-09 Thread Nate Byrnes
I must claim some ignorance, I come from the application world... but, from a data integrity perspective, it makes a whole lot of sense to store video, images, documents, whatever in the database rather than on the file system external to it. Personally, I would use LOB's, but I do not know

Re: [PERFORM] Storing Digital Video

2006-02-09 Thread Craig A. James
Nate Byrnes wrote: I must claim some ignorance, I come from the application world... but, from a data integrity perspective, it makes a whole lot of sense to store video, images, documents, whatever in the database rather than on the file system external to it. Personally, I would use LOB's,

Re: [PERFORM] Storing Digital Video

2006-02-09 Thread Nate Byrnes
Thanks, until Postgres can pay my bills (hopefully soon...) I will have to be an Oracle guy. Aside from the filesystem being better at managing large files (which I do agree) are there performance implications for the storage in the DB? Where I work, the question is not can you add the

Re: [PERFORM] Storing Digital Video

2006-02-09 Thread Jim C. Nasby
On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 07:18:49AM -0800, Craig A. James wrote: Nate Byrnes wrote: I must claim some ignorance, I come from the application world... but, from a data integrity perspective, it makes a whole lot of sense to store video, images, documents, whatever in the database rather than

Re: [PERFORM] Storing Digital Video

2006-02-09 Thread Jan Peterson
In my experience, you don't want to store this stuff in the database. In general, it will work fine, until you have to VACUUM the pg_largeobject table. Unless you have a very powerful I/O subsystem, this VACUUM will kill your performance. You're forgetting about cleanup and transactions. If

Re: [PERFORM] Storing Digital Video

2006-02-06 Thread Albert Cervera Areny
A Dimecres 01 Febrer 2006 01:32, Rodrigo Madera va escriure: I am concerned with performance issues involving the storage of DV on a database. I though of some options, which would be the most advised for speed? 1) Pack N frames inside a container and store the container to the db. 2) Store

Re: [PERFORM] Storing Digital Video

2006-02-04 Thread Jeffrey W. Baker
On Tue, 2006-01-31 at 16:32 -0800, Rodrigo Madera wrote: I am concerned with performance issues involving the storage of DV on a database. I though of some options, which would be the most advised for speed? 1) Pack N frames inside a container and store the container to the db. 2) Store

[PERFORM] Storing Digital Video

2006-01-31 Thread Rodrigo Madera
I am concerned with performance issues involving the storage of DV on a database. I though of some options, which would be the most advised for speed? 1) Pack N frames inside a container and store the container to the db. 2) Store each frame in a separate record in the table frames. 3) (type

Re: [PERFORM] Storing Digital Video

2006-01-31 Thread Matt Davies | Postgresql List
Rodrigo Madera wrote: I am concerned with performance issues involving the storage of DV on a database. I though of some options, which would be the most advised for speed? 1) Pack N frames inside a container and store the container to the db. 2) Store each frame in a separate record in the