Re: Database versus filesystem for storing images

From: Jorge Godoy <jgodoy(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Jeremy Haile" <jhaile(at)fastmail(dot)fm>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Database versus filesystem for storing images
Date: 2007-01-05 22:24:05
Message-ID: 871wm9i03e.fsf@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

"Jeremy Haile" <jhaile(at)fastmail(dot)fm> writes:

> Another thing to consider is that storing them in the file system makes
> it much easier to browse the images using third-party tools, update
> them, archive them (by gzipping or whatever). This is much more
> difficult if they are stored in the database.

If you touch the files with third-party tools how are you going to prevent
that they aren't missing when the database say they are there? If you're
referencing them somehow, you have to guarantee that they are there... Or am
I the only one that is thinking about referential integrity with those files?

--
Jorge Godoy <jgodoy(at)gmail(dot)com>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message John McCawley 2007-01-05 22:28:50 Re: Database versus filesystem for storing images
Previous Message Jorge Godoy 2007-01-05 22:22:28 Re: Database versus filesystem for storing images