There is one instance in which it is *not* convenient to store in seperate files: when you are exporting to another machine (maybe a sub set of data from an internal server to an external web server) or doing replication.
j----- k----- On Wednesday 19 May 2004 01:01 pm, Greg Willits said something like: > On May 19, 2004, at 1:19 PM, David Blomstrom wrote: > > I'd like to get some feedback on storing images in > > MySQL databases. The stuff I've read so far suggests > > that it's fairly difficult to work with images in > > MySQL, and they also slow down databases. > > > > I've also read that there isn't much you can do with > > BLOB's that you can't do with PHP manipulating images > > stored in an ordinary folder. > > > > So I just wondered if BLOB's are worth my time. For > > example, I'm working on a database with information > > about the 50 states. If I have maps of each state, > > pictures of each state's capital, etc., is there some > > BLOB feature that I would find really useful? > > All "conventional wisdom" I've ever come across for this type of > application is that there's no advantage to keeping the image in the db > itself. Just keep them as files on the server, store a filename &/or > location in the db if necessary, and use your middleware to display the > images. Its faster, easier to maintain, and easier to backup. IMO, > storing images in the db just bloats the file and complicates all the > backup issues. > > -- greg willits -- Joshua J. Kugler -- Fairbanks, Alaska -- ICQ#:13706295 Every knee shall bow, and every tongue confess, in heaven, on earth, and under the earth, that Jesus Christ is LORD -- Count on it! -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
