At 9:05 AM -0500 8/19/99, Ronald Beck wrote:
>What do you get back with a "select * from <db>..." when you save a 60mb
>gif within the database?
The original question was 60KB, not 60MB, but suppose it were 60MB.
In that case, I assume you would never write such a query unless you
actually needed the image itself. For example, if there where other
image-content related fields in each row, you'd specifically select the
ones you want, not use a generic "*".
>While Paul makes an interesting argument that it doesn't much matter, I
>would personally go for the flexibility of saving the gif pathname in
>the db and storing the actual gif in another directory. That way I
>could provide three or four disk drives of space for the graphic files
>and still keep the database managable on a single drive.
>
>Just IMHO.
I'm not so much argument for a given position, I'm more interested in
seeing what people have to say on both sides of the issue. I'd noticed
recently, both in this list and in the PHP list, that the position for
storing images in the file system had been put forth as the "of *course*
you'd do it that way" solution, and it simply wasn't clear to me that it's
such an obvious thing. I'm trying to understand what leads people to that
position.
--
Paul DuBois, paul@stripped
