Re: Caching and Blobs in PG? Was: Can PG replace redis, amqp, s3 in the future?

John R Pierce <pierce@xxxxxxxxxxxx> · Thu, 4 May 2017 14:21:00 -0700



    On 5/4/2017 2:08 PM, Sven R. Kunze
      wrote:

    
        No.  You can
          certainly use PostgreSQL to store blobs.  But then, you need
          to store the PostgreSQL data **someplace**.
          

          If you don't store it in S3, you have to store it somewhere
          else.
          

        I don't understand what you mean here. AFAIK storing blobs in PG
        is not recommended since it is not very efficient.
        

      Seems like several people here disagree with this conventional
      wisdom.
      

      I think what he was talking about the data itself. You have to
      store the bits and bytes somewhere (e.g. on S3).
    
    
    afaik, S3 is not suitable for the $PGDATA directory, its more of
      an archival block file store for sequential access.    for the
      actual database storage in the AWS world, you'd either use EC2
      local storage, or EBS, and I've heard from more than a few people
      that EBS can be something of a sand trap.
    re: storing blobs in postgres, I would be very hesitant to
      storage LARGE amounts of bulk data directly in postgres 

    
    -- 
john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz