Good morning Karol,
yes, storing big data chunks outside database file is an opinion we
regularly use, too. It has the serious disadvantage, that you've to deal
with different addressing and right schemes on different operating
systems and deployment environments (local/remote servers, UNC-paths
e
Hi,
But you also misunderstud advice.
Blobs are not stored in table with its other fields. In record exists only blob
id and blob is stored on separate pages. Then moving it to separate table do
nothing.
But i always prefere store big data like document scans outside of database and
in main
As I fear, some people misunderstood Frank's hints, I'd like to clarify:
I know no reason to store blobs in data table with other objects data,
it should be stored in separate table(s).
This does not (significantly) grow database, does not make it
significantly slower and does not have any impact
Em 24/4/2014 17:08, Mark Rotteveel escreveu:
> On 24-4-2014 20:49, Frank Schlottmann-Gödde wrote:
>> As a compromise, I would suggest to place your blobs into a separate
>> table, it will increase the size of your main database, but will also
>> speed up the acccess to your blobs without interferin
Firebird Version: 2.5.2.26540
OS: Windows 7
I'm having an update permissions problem on a SQL update statement when I use
the SQL in a stored procedure with "RETURNING/INTO".
I have granted update permissions on column1 and column2 to role1 with this
command:
GRANT REFERENCES, SELECT, UPDATE
On 24-4-2014 20:49, Frank Schlottmann-Gödde wrote:
> As a compromise, I would suggest to place your blobs into a separate
> table, it will increase the size of your main database, but will also
> speed up the acccess to your blobs without interfering with everyday
> database operations.
As most bl
On 04/24/2014 01:32 PM, Mags Phangisa wrote:
>
>
> Thanks Thomas. Blobs are seldom accessed.
As a compromise, I would suggest to place your blobs into a separate
table, it will increase the size of your main database, but will also
speed up the acccess to your blobs without interfering with eve
Thanks Thomas. Blobs are seldom accessed.
Much appreciated.
Mags
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 11:32 AM, Thomas Beckmann <
thomas.beckm...@assfinet.de> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Mags,
>
> my experience says "it depends"... I don't feel big databases beeing
> significantly slower than smaller ones, and the over
Hi Mags,
my experience says "it depends"... I don't feel big databases beeing
significantly slower than smaller ones, and the overhead of accessing
the blobs in the second db is not trivial, but: If you have to access
the blobs only very seldom and do regular backup-restore-cycles, it can
be a goo
Is it more advantageous, speed-wise, to split a database into two, i.e. one
database for data and another one just for attachments?
Regards,
Mags
10 matches
Mail list logo
