Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations SkipVought on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
can't see images on remote computer 1
- Thread starter shoenet
- Start date
-
1
- #2
"Windows cant see the images "
what does this REALLY mean in your perspective?
u can't access images that stored on a mapped drive on antoher server? it is then the path issue and it depends on how the DB points to the image (if the developer had mapped drive with letter "X" then u will need to point to the same location...FM sees them as windows sees drives....FM can not distinguish between C: being a local and G: being a network....esentially making FM "think" that the drive is no logner there eg.
G:\\server_name\image\image1.jpg =in FM's "eyes" = G:\image\image.jpg
vs.
reference only
it is the same working approach but the difference is:
- inserting image/file into container will be trated as such and your DB will grow along with the size of the object (eg. image.gif)...if you have an image that is 500 K in size it will also increase your DB size for as much.
...so if u have 1000 records with 500K each....well u can guess how many records u will be able to have (not as nearly as much ) and Especially if people insert photoshop file with all the layers... (file.psd) where each image can easily be 5MB!!!!
- the solution to this would inserting images into container field and saving it with "[x] Store only a refrence to the file"
what this does is basically stores only a small text string ...eg. "C:\my_docs\images\image.jpg"
-this helps DB speed over the web as well
Now, u will say :"How in the hel* am I going to remeber all the file name etc....well in this case most developers would associate the image_name.jpg with the record_ID so in case images get moved arround u know which one belong where.
eg.
[RecordID]-----
========================
abc123 ------abc123.jpg
xyz1001 ----xyz1001.jpg
=======================
All the best!
> need more info?
:: don't click HERE ::
what does this REALLY mean in your perspective?
u can't access images that stored on a mapped drive on antoher server? it is then the path issue and it depends on how the DB points to the image (if the developer had mapped drive with letter "X" then u will need to point to the same location...FM sees them as windows sees drives....FM can not distinguish between C: being a local and G: being a network....esentially making FM "think" that the drive is no logner there eg.
G:\\server_name\image\image1.jpg =in FM's "eyes" = G:\image\image.jpg
vs.
reference only
it is the same working approach but the difference is:
- inserting image/file into container will be trated as such and your DB will grow along with the size of the object (eg. image.gif)...if you have an image that is 500 K in size it will also increase your DB size for as much.
...so if u have 1000 records with 500K each....well u can guess how many records u will be able to have (not as nearly as much ) and Especially if people insert photoshop file with all the layers... (file.psd) where each image can easily be 5MB!!!!
- the solution to this would inserting images into container field and saving it with "[x] Store only a refrence to the file"
what this does is basically stores only a small text string ...eg. "C:\my_docs\images\image.jpg"
-this helps DB speed over the web as well
Now, u will say :"How in the hel* am I going to remeber all the file name etc....well in this case most developers would associate the image_name.jpg with the record_ID so in case images get moved arround u know which one belong where.
eg.
[RecordID]-----
========================
abc123 ------abc123.jpg
xyz1001 ----xyz1001.jpg
=======================
All the best!
> need more info?
:: don't click HERE ::
The former post is one reason for not seeing images. There are several plug-ins, including File Toolbox which can capture the filename, path, size, date, etc automatically. Troi File is the most used plug-in for this but it is not free. Linking is also good advise, but it has drawbacks. I generally allow users to import, paste, or otherwise place data directly into container fields and them I use ExportFM to control how, when, and where I save the images. Like the earlier author mentioned. It needs to be in a location that everyone has access rights to. It is common to create a share point for such items.
Hope this helps
Hope this helps
Hello Gang!
After this issue has risen in more posts I re-read this thread and just wanted to add that :: svkingpen :: has made a great point about having "regular" users handle images in this setting.
Allow user to do the acutall "embedding of images" and then run your scripts against container field and extract them your self ( assumg that "your self" = DB admin) and then make sure that all users are mapped ( same letter/ network drive) to that share on the file server......to their eyes it will look the same while your backups run peacefully storing only a few KB of DB vs. a few MB Anyhow.....
All the best!
> need more info?
:: don't click HERE ::
After this issue has risen in more posts I re-read this thread and just wanted to add that :: svkingpen :: has made a great point about having "regular" users handle images in this setting.
Allow user to do the acutall "embedding of images" and then run your scripts against container field and extract them your self ( assumg that "your self" = DB admin) and then make sure that all users are mapped ( same letter/ network drive) to that share on the file server......to their eyes it will look the same while your backups run peacefully storing only a few KB of DB vs. a few MB Anyhow.....
All the best!
> need more info?
:: don't click HERE ::
- Status
Similar threads
