> "Leonel Nunez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> > If the database had built-in functions to manipulate images (make a >> > thumbnail, add text ont it.., make a montage of two pictures) and I >> could >> > write something like >> > select thumbnail(image_field, 100, 100) from images_table >> > that would be a good reason to go the db route versus the filesystem >> > route. > > <snip> > >> With Python and the python imaging library you can do this : >> >> image is a bytea field >> >> curs = conn.cursor () >> curs.execute( "select image from images where name = %s" ,(thename, )) >> row = curs.fetchone() >> if row: >> im = Image.open (StringIO.StringIO(row[0])) >> im.thumbnail (160,120 ) >> imagetmp = StringIO.StringIO() >> im.save ( imagetmp , "JPEG") >> print ("Content-type: image/jpeg\n\n") >> print ( imagetmp.getvalue()) > > I think part of the point, which you missed, is the convenience of having > the thumbnailing as part of the SQL language by making it a stored > procedure. > > I did a presentation for WPLUG not too long ago where I created C > functions in Postgres compiled against the GSOAP library that allowed > you to make simple SOAP calls in SQL within PostgreSQL. Neat stuff. > > The problem with creating those kinds of functions is the CPU overhead. > We'll be generating the thumbnails and storing them in a "thumbnail" > field in the record, so we don't have to regenerate the thumbnail each > time it's needed. > > BTW: our reason for keeping the thumbnails in fields is so they can be > replicated with Slony along with the rest of the database. > > -- > Bill Moran > > We meddle. People don't like to be meddled with. We tell them what to > do, > what to think. Don't run, don't walk. We're in their homes and in their > heads and we haven't the right. > > River Tam > >
you are 100% right Leonel ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings