(jcwren) RE: Re: Mysql & perl

Why would your preference be to not store the image in the database? It has the advantage of being implicitly backed up when a backup is run on the database file system. It also eliminates the need for unique file names, and gives you the access control facilties provided by the database itself.

Typically, my *personal* preference would be to store the image in the database. And disk space is disk space, no matter where you put the image.

I wonder if this is one of those religious war things, possibly?

--Chris

e-mail jcwren

Comment on (jcwren) RE: Re: Mysql & perl

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
RE: RE: Re: Mysql & perl by btrott (Parson) on Jul 14, 2000 at 22:46 UTC
You wrote: > I wonder if this is one of those religious war > things, possibly? Well, possibly--but if so, I'm not one of the participants, I don't think. It's really just a personal preference rather than a religious thing. :) The big reason I'd rather store binary content in the filesystem is that the facilities for dealing with BLOBs are very ugly in certain databases. (Admittedly, this isn't really the case in MySQL.) But still, I just like keeping the data separate, because when inserting/updating/selecting records, I think it keeps things simpler. But there are probably reasons both way, and your points are well taken.	[reply]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

RE: RE: Re: Mysql & perl
by btrott (Parson) on Jul 14, 2000 at 22:46 UTC

The big reason I'd rather store binary content in the filesystem is that the facilities for dealing with BLOBs are very ugly in certain databases. (Admittedly, this isn't really the case in MySQL.) But still, I just like keeping the data separate, because when inserting/updating/selecting records, I think it keeps things simpler.

But there are probably reasons both way, and your points are well taken.

[reply]