Hello everyone, I've been using

[BabyJeffy]

Hello everyone,

I've been using mySQL for a while now... but I'd appreciate your feedback on a recent suggestion that was made for our intranet website (which I am developer for).

The suggestion was to put all images used for the intranet website into a mySQL database (so that we have no images stored on the server at all). We use Apache, Tomcat and mySQL (all fairly new installs -- and all working nicely on Windows 2003 Server).

I had a few issues with this. By placing all the images into a database, wouldn't that place a rather heavy burden on mySQL (user base is approximately 200 total)? I can imagine if just the image paths were stored in a database (and served from an Apache directory) it would be less taxing... but storing the actual images would prevent caching and make the use of Apache redundant (wouldn't it?).

It's not like we have many images. The intranet website doesn't use 'spacer gifs' etc... but there is some table "furniture" in use on the current design.

I'd really appreciate your thoughts on this... especially if you have had first-hand experience.

Cheers,
Jeff

 

[r937]

this is a very common conundrum, and by a very large margin the benefits of storing the images in the database (if any -- see below) are far outweighed by the disadvantages, some of which you have already touched on (performance is poorer, no caching, etc.)

ask whoever is suggesting it to identify the benefits, and i'll bet they don't come up with anything more than "it just seems like it will be 'cleaner'"

rudy

http://r937.com/

SQL Consulting

 

[BabyJeffy]

Thanks rudy... the more I look about the web, the more I am determined to try and prevent this from becoming a reality on our intranet.

If anyone else out there has a particularly relevant URL that I could use to help support my case, I'd appreciate it.

Thanks in advance,
Jeff

 

[hos2]

search the mysql forum blob or images and you will find enough info I think