On Saturday 30 October 2004 23:06, Robby Russell wrote: > > I understand the argument regarding a future change in thumbnail sizes. > > However, generating thumbnails on a filesystem of images is something > > that is easily scripted and can be performed on an as-needed basis. > > (ImageMagick is great for this sort of thing, and scripts in PHP using > > GD could also be used.) > > As I can do when I want it to be a thumbnail. Infact, in PostgreSQL, I > can use plPHP, plPerl, psycopg, etc and perform these tasks within > database functions. This isn't an issue at all. So the point (still) is why generate each request on the fly? > Also, Gallery 2, is moving to a database backend, one would wonder why > that would be a good move, considering the sole purpose of gallery is to > display images. Moving to a database backend is a good move on the part of Gallery because the current version uses flat files to store its data. However are you certain that the database backend is also used to store the pictures themselves? AFAICT this is not the case and pictures are still stored in the file system. -- Jason Wong -> Gremlins Associates -> www.gremlins.biz Open Source Software Systems Integrators * Web Design & Hosting * Internet & Intranet Applications Development * ------------------------------------------ Search the list archives before you post http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=php-general ------------------------------------------ /* Earth Army Recruiting Center: What are you, chicken? Buk buk buk! */ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
