You can do either, many people have responded and given their thoughs on
the matter. I personally avoid storing images in a database, the
filesystem is better equipped IMO to handle files. On top of the
overhead of storing the image in your database you will be creating
additional database traffi
At 15:54 29.01.2003, Vladimir Galkov spoke out and said:
[snip]
> Me too. I add tracks to DB only and store images as independent files. My
>experiments with storing images in DB shows large memory use wich slow down
>other processes (especialy if I need to c
Two problems for filesystem:
1. You cannot store over a tot number of images on some systems. Thus,
storing them in DB will be headechless. Unless, you know that there will
be at most some hundred pics or so.
2. Storing them in filesystem gives more trouble as you need to make
sure it is - writab
Me too. I add tracks to DB only and store images as independent files. My
experiments with storing images in DB shows large memory use wich slow down
other processes (especialy if I need to choose several images from DB).
But if pictures unnumerous and small (smaler 30-40kb) my advice - insert
t
on 29/01/03 11:16 AM, Manuel Ochoa ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> I writting a php program for a small insurance company and they want to
> receive uploaded digital photos.
>
> Should I store the photos in a mysql database or in a directory on the hard
> drive?
>
> If you have experience with this
I writting a php program for a small insurance company and they want to receive
uploaded digital photos.
Should I store the photos in a mysql database or in a directory on the hard drive?
If you have experience with this any advice would be appreciated.
6 matches
Mail list logo
