Hi, just a quick note.
> A) There's no *point* in keeping the image in the database.
> A DBMS is all about searching, comparing, relations, etc. You
> get *none* of these by storing the image data in the DB.
Correct if you have a small amount of images, problem if you
have thousands of these p
Let me add my $.02
CHP> A) There's no *point* in keeping the image in the database.
CHP> A DBMS is all about searching, comparing, relations, etc. You
CHP> get *none* of these by storing the image data in the DB.
Sometimes it just easier to store all things in same place. Right now
I working on
Hey Jeremy, Michael,
I wanted to thank you both for your replies, they definatly have given me
some more insight into the situation, and also gave me some extra motivation to
keep my commitment to mysql. Like most other people, i hope this 'mess' can be
resolved in the near future.
Jeremy, to
On Sun, Aug 26, 2001 at 04:45:07PM +0200, Chris Chabot wrote:
> Hi Jeremy, thanks for a good reply. In awnser to some of your questions :
>
> Jeremy Zawodny wrote:
>
> > > Now, a few years after first using MySql, a major dispute seems to
> > > plague the 'image' of MySql, and posibly also t
Sigh, that wasnt realy the point of the email, but ok, i knew it could
happen when i wrote it.
The images -are- stored in the database in the product i'm activly
marketing, its a content management system, which can be administered via a
web interface. All text / html / images are stored in the D
> > I would also strongly suggest not storing your images in the
> database but
> > rather a link to the image.
>
> even that - why?
> if you're using an ultrafast webserver like Tux in combination with
> Apache/php-perl
> the Tux webserver serves the images incredibly fast (see specweb tests)
> I would also strongly suggest not storing your images in the database but
> rather a link to the image.
even that - why?
if you're using an ultrafast webserver like Tux in combination with
Apache/php-perl
the Tux webserver serves the images incredibly fast (see specweb tests)
what advantage
ROTECTED]>; "Chris Chabot"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, August 25, 2001 3:21 PM
Subject: Re: MySQL Still a wise choice for developers?
>
> > I would also strongly suggest not storing your images in the database
but
> > rather a link to t
On Sat, Aug 25, 2001 at 06:37:26PM +0200, Chris Chabot wrote:
> I have been looking at this mysql.com/org dispute for a while now,
> and i must say i am getting more and more wurried.
Many of us have.
> I have been a faithfull user of MySql for some years now. Not
> because it is the 'best
> The last thing that wurries me is the lack of updates on the issue,
> when i, as a wurried client & customer go to the mysql.com website, the
> only thing i find is a 'open inventation for 2001/07/18'. Being
> deep-august i presume that has come and gone, and no results or
> communications c
Well, I've been a die-hard mysql fan for two years now and have been using
it with php for a web-based app. It has never crashed on me and has
performed perfectly.
As our app has grown, we have found a need for subselects and complex
queries and the work-arounds were ok until our databases starte
11 matches
Mail list logo
