is the increase of the network traffic noticable? The query is pretty small just text. Do u really think this might increase the traffic?
I also noticed that the image is not cached anymore. Is this true for all blobs, or do I just access them in a wron way? (I am requesting a php file in the <img tag with the statement inside and output them before sending a jpeg header with an echo) Thanx for your help, Andy "Pierre-Alain Joye" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb im Newsbeitrag [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > On Mon, 1 Jul 2002 14:17:53 +0200 > "andy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi there, > > > > I am wondering if anybody has experiance in saving images to blob in mysql. > > > > I do save images with 1 K and 4 KB to blob fields while I used to save them > > to file. It seams to me that this is much slower accessing the files. The > > images take a bit (really short but absolutly noticable) to show up on the > > site. Is there a way to improve the performance, and why is this happening? > > I thought the performance might even boost after storing them to blobs. > > Not really, the OS filesystem contains features that makes it always faster than a sql query, that will increase your network traffic too. > > Inserting images or whatever binary data in a database does not have much sense, you could not do a query with this field, cannot be indexed (dunno if exists a DB that implement a image indexer ;) ). Storing relative pathes gave me always more portabilities between DBM. > > In some case, you have to insert images (or every others binary data) in DB (due to global permissions system only avaible for the DB and not for the filesystem, for example), but as far is possible, I avoid to do it so. > > IMHO :) > > pa -- PHP Database Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
