Am 2006-05-12 09:28:36, schrieb tedd: > But, at some point (and I forgot to mention this in my previous post) > all programmers start thinking in collections of data and a dB > becomes a well suited solution (record holder and organizer) for > that. As such, all data connected to a record, including images, are > "better" suited if organized and saved in one place.
And if your database like mine crashs then you have lost all... Restoring a Database of 1,8 TByte takes some hours!!! No one restore a database of 1,8 TByte in less then one hour. I have my database and currently 1 FileServer with the binary files. (I will switch to 3 FileServers of 2U insteed of one 6U) > I did the same thing including merging a copyright on the image. I > believe that saving all related data in a dB is really the "right" > way to go. From there, you can do anything you want with the data. Served from a filesystem too The overhead form getting a pic from the database is bigger then from a filesystem. I had allready tried it. I can resize on the fly too. Now, where is the problem, if a php script get the pic from a filserver using http or ftp? My system is pgsql.example.com / (maybve a cluster) client ---------> www.example.com \ bin1.example.com bin2.example.com Greetings Michelle Konzack -- Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/ ##################### Debian GNU/Linux Consultant ##################### Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886 50, rue de Soultz MSM LinuxMichi 0033/6/61925193 67100 Strasbourg/France IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com) -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php