Re: Caching Websites

On 12 May 2003, Doug McNaught wrote:

> Adam Kessel <adam@bostoncoop.net> writes:
> 
> > Based on the documetation, I don't immediately see any disadvantage to
> > using these large objects--does anyone else see why I might not want to
> > store archived websites in large objects?  
> 
> It's going to be (probably) a little slower than the filesystem
> solution, and backups are a little more involved (you can't use
> pg_dumpall) but everything works--I have been using LOs with success
> for a couple years now.

If the files aren't too big (under a meg or so each) you can either try 
bytea encoding / bytea field types, or you can base64 encode, escape, and 
store it in a text field.  Since pgsql autocompresses text fields, the 
fact that base64 is a little bigger is no big deal.

The advantage to storing them in bytea or text with base64 is that 
pg_dump backs up your whole database.