I agree completely, I do not think Postgresql is a good fit for Shalini based on the conversation so far
tracking Concurrency is going to be a killer... But i see the temptation to use a DB for this as the updates are ACID less likely to corrupted data for X reason On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 12:12 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Justin <zzzzz.g...@gmail.com> writes: > > I now see what is causing this specific issue... > > The update and row versions is happening on 2kb chunk at a time, That's > > going to make tracking what other clients are doing a difficult task. > > Yeah, it's somewhat unfortunate that the chunkiness of the underlying > data storage becomes visible to clients if they try to do concurrent > updates of the same large object. Ideally you'd only get a concurrency > failure if you tried to overwrite the same byte(s) that somebody else > did, but as it stands, modifying nearby bytes might be enough --- or > not, if there's a chunk boundary between. > > On the whole, though, it's not clear to me why concurrent updates of > sections of large objects is a good application design. You probably > ought to rethink how you're storing your data. > > regards, tom lane >
