Well, it seems to me that the confusion comes from the fact that we are comparing apples and oranges.
The first example is talking about the performance assuming you have 100's of people requesting the same picture, where as the second example is talking about the performance assuming you have the same person re-downloading the same picture. But I would also like to question the extra layer. Not that MySQL doesn't have better caching, that is possible, but it adds and extra layer to the process because MySQL still stores the data on the drive. Also, does the web server cache images? If so, then we are ahead of the game even more. Just my ramblings on the subject and since I am not an expert at this whole PHP thing please correct me. Brian Goralczyk Verizon Wireless -----Original Message----- From: Gerard Samuel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 3:35 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PHP] Images in MySQL vs directory/file? On Wednesday 10 December 2003 02:43 pm, Galen wrote: > If you store images that are played with a lot on > the disk, it'll likely be slower than MySQL due to MySQL having better > caching. I disagree. Depending on your setup, when a file based image is downloaded to a user's computer, its cached there. No need to fetch it again, till it expires. I don't think thats possible via images from a database, but I may be wrong. Feel free to correct me... -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
