I am experiencing problems inserting BLOB's into Postgresql 7.3.2:

module.database.support.PostgreSQL71 -  SQL      : INSERT INTO cpb_images (number, 
otype, owner, title, description, handle, itype, popup, notitie) VALUES (?, ?, ?, ?, 
?, ?, ?, ?, ?)
module.database.support.PostgreSQL71 -  SQLState : null
module.database.support.PostgreSQL71 -  ErrorCode: 0
module.database.support.PostgreSQL71 -  Message  : ERROR:  oidin: error in 
"\377\330\377\340\000

I am a bit puzzled why the PostgreSQL71 class is used here for this BLOB insert. I 
would expect the PostgreSQL72 class since handling of blobs changed in 7.2. Anyway, I 
am using Postgresql 7.3.2 and things don't work. 
Would this work properly on PostgreSQL7.2 ? Would it be hard for me to make the 
appropriate code changes in the PostgreSQL class ? I am quite experienced in JDBC 
programming. 
> 
> On Friday 20 June 2003 09:46 am, Peter Reitsma wrote:
> > This has been the only incompatibility I encountered so 
> far. I am using MMBase 1.6.3 and the JDBC driver 7.3.3. 
> 
> Ok the other problem is about blobs postgress 7.1 or 7.2 made 
> is possible to use OID's for blobs
> (really storing the data on disk)
> the jdbc driver at some point mapped blobs to oid's
> but with the new jdbc driver it maps blobs to the BYTEA type
> 
> the bytea type can be used for small blobs to once the blob 
> is a few MB's it's impossible to store them in the database
>  because it requires to much memory. (the original byte[] + 
> and escaped version (in a string buffer) + the insert/update 
> sql command containing
> an other escaped version. if you have luck and you don't run 
> out of memory it will be the postgress server that will tilt.
> 
> I did not find any documentation on the reason why the 
> postgress gui's moved from storing blob's on disk to storing 
> blobs back in the 
> database. But the bottom line is that with blobs + postgress 
> there still are some problems
> 
> 
> > > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> > > Van: Eduard Witteveen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Verzonden: vrijdag 20 juni 2003 9:28
> > > Aan: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Onderwerp: Re: MMBase vs. Postgresql 7.3
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Kees Jongenburger wrote:
> > > >>>If MMBase is supposed to work fine on 7.3.2. than this 
> > > might be a bug
> > > >>>that should be solved by someone in
> > > >>>org.mmbase.module.database.support.PostgreSQL72
> > > > postgress masters backward incompatibility very well and 
> > > with the added value 
> > > > of the jdbc driver that handles blobs in different way's 
> > > for every version it 
> > > > very hard to support the database. This is not a 
> suprise to me. the 
> > > > "function/stored procedure" here was created because  with 
> > > postgress we use 
> > > > table inheritance but postgress does't handle
> > > > foreign-keys wel nor do the constraints on inherited tables 
> > > very well
> > > > (if in  mmbase_object we define number to be unique that 
> > > does not prevent us 
> > > > from creating other entries with the same number)
> > > > 
> > > > We need to find a good maintainer for the postgres storage 
> > > layer and for now 
> > > > it looks like every postgress version will need it's own 
> > > storage layer.
> > > Well, if this is the only point on were it misbehaviours, im 
> > > prepared to 
> > > create an Postgres73.java.
> > > -but- then the lookup.xml should point to the proper 
> classes, and not 
> > > the storage classes (all lookup_postgresql.xml info points to 
> > > postgresql.xml --> org.mmbase.storage.database.PostgreSqlStorage
> > > Why has this been changed and by whom? (also: 
> > > lookup_postgresql.xml is 
> > > not an valid xml!)
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> 
> -- 
> Kees Jongenburger
> Mediapark C101 Hilversum  
> +31 (0)35 6772910
> 
> 
> 

Reply via email to