On Thu, May 20, 2004 at 05:45:58PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Another perspective on the subject of BLOB vs. Links. > > Links are easier to implement and may be an OK way to start. However, a file system > is really a crude database, and I emphasize "crude". It's not very good at handling > high transaction rates, access from multiple machines, or volume. > > If your application grows quickly and before you know it you have hundreds of > folders with thousands of files in each - your file system will slow to a crawl. All > the performance, security, and consistancy features developers have worked so hard > to put into database engines don't or barely exist in file systems. > > So - if you go the link approach - you'll be fine for a while, but when you see the > directory structure starting to buckle - it might be time to give BLOBs another look.
I'm going to be honest, sorry. Your argument seems to make sense and
this information is really relevant for me -- thanks. I, however, just
get this fuzzy feeling inside that tells me not to trust anything
technical any AOL user may say. Sorry again, but this time for making it
seem like a troll. It's not, seriously, I'm just being honest.
Can anyone non-AOL-lite back up Udikarni's argument? 8)
Luis
--
GnuPG Key fingerprint = 113F B290 C6D2 0251 4D84 A34A 6ADD 4937 E20A 525E
pgpyK2Pw5sOiK.pgp
Description: PGP signature
