This doesn't answer your question, but I thought I'd throw my opinion in
anyway.
My personal view is that in general, binary files have no place in
databases. Filesystems are for files, databases are for data. My design
choice is to store the files in a fileystem and use the database to hold
Harvey, Allan AC пишет:
I find it fine. Bit different usage though.
I store about 200 50MB items.
Thanks
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
You don't like filesystems ?
You know file system which supports SQL, referential integrity, and
managed transactions ?
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
Naz Gassiep пишет:
This doesn't answer your question, but I thought I'd throw my opinion in
anyway.
My personal view is that in general, binary files have no place in
databases. Filesystems are for files, databases are for data. My design
choice is to store the files in a fileystem and use th
Postgres User пишет:
I recently heard from Josh Berkus that at least one major CMS
application uses Postgres to store entire HTML pages (including image
files) in order to support full versioning.
As a general rule, I prefer not to store BLOBS in a DB- I'd rather
leave the BLOB in the file syste
Nikolay Moskvichev wrote:
> Hi All!
>
> Question is : How suitable PG for storing about 2 000 000 binary files
> 0,5-2,0 Mb size each ? It is not planned the big number of clients or a
> plenty of updatings. Like photoalbum on local host.
In our CMS we store all page data in the database - either
Thomas Kellerer wrote:
Merlin Moncure wrote on 05.04.2007 23:24:
I think most reasons why not to store binaries in the
database boil down to performance.
Having implemented an application where the files were stored in the
filesystem instead of the database I have to say, with my experience I
lol.
yeah, I meant binary blobs. :-)
Thomas Kellerer wrote:
William Garrison wrote on 06.04.2007 00:22:
I have actually never stored data in the database.
Hmm, funny statement somehow ;)
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: don't forget to increas
William Garrison wrote on 06.04.2007 00:22:
I have actually never stored data in the database.
Hmm, funny statement somehow ;)
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
I have actually never stored data in the database. But in a recent
project I've realized it might have been smart. We store a terabytes of
data on the file system, and many times I would love to have an ACID
compliant file system. For example, if I delete an entry, I need to
delete it from d
Merlin Moncure wrote on 05.04.2007 23:24:
I think most reasons why not to store binaries in the
database boil down to performance.
Having implemented an application where the files were stored in the filesystem
instead of the database I have to say, with my experience I would store the
files
On 4/5/07, Listmail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My personal view is that in general, binary files have no place in
> databases. Filesystems are for files, databases are for data. My design
> choice is to store the files in a fileystem and use the database to hold
> metadata as well as a pointer
My personal view is that in general, binary files have no place in
databases. Filesystems are for files, databases are for data. My design
choice is to store the files in a fileystem and use the database to hold
metadata as well as a pointer to the file.
If you *must* put files into the d
This doesn't answer your question, but I thought I'd throw my opinion in
anyway.
My personal view is that in general, binary files have no place in
databases. Filesystems are for files, databases are for data. My design
choice is to store the files in a fileystem and use the database to hold
I recently heard from Josh Berkus that at least one major CMS
application uses Postgres to store entire HTML pages (including image
files) in order to support full versioning.
As a general rule, I prefer not to store BLOBS in a DB- I'd rather
leave the BLOB in the file system and let the db save
I find it fine. Bit different usage though.
I store about 200 50MB items.
Allan
> Hi All!
>
> Question is : How suitable PG for storing about 2 000 000
binary files
> 0,5-2,0 Mb size each ? It is not planned the big number of
clients or a
> plenty of updatings. Like photoalbum on local host
You don't like filesystems ?
On Wed, 04 Apr 2007 07:44:57 +0200, Nikolay Moskvichev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Hi All!
Question is : How suitable PG for storing about 2 000 000 binary files
0,5-2,0 Mb size each ? It is not planned the big number of clients or a
plenty of updati
Hi All!
Question is : How suitable PG for storing about 2 000 000 binary files
0,5-2,0 Mb size each ? It is not planned the big number of clients or a
plenty of updatings. Like photoalbum on local host.
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you c
18 matches
Mail list logo
