I've been reading this thread, but I can't see the advantages of storing files in a database. I've always had the impression that a *file* system was the appropriate place to store files.
Access can be arranged easily by other means. Replication seems more silly, since one also copies the stored files to the slave. This not only adds to the traffic between slave and master, but also wastes diskspace. Furthermore large files may cause you to hit the max_allowed_packet size (PDF's of 5MB or larger are no exception in real life). I've built a system which includes the possibility of downloading one's own bills in PDF format. This system runs on load balanced webservers with one mysql server. The files are stored on a different machine that cannot be accessed directly from the web. Scripts validate access to the PDF and serve it to the client. Works like a charm ;-) Regards, Jigal. ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Eve Atley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2004 5:42 PM Subject: RE: Saving file into database > > It does make the database larger.. as far as overhead... As you > can't just store the file as a blob.. You'll need some referencing data in order to > find it, and restore it back out of the database.. > > I just checked out my database (100's of files) which has: > > Total file size: 1765.34MB > > Mysql files are: -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
