Am 2006-05-12 09:28:36, schrieb tedd:
> But, at some point (and I forgot to mention this in my previous post)
> all programmers start thinking in collections of data and a dB
> becomes a well suited solution (record holder and organizer) for
> that. As such, all data connected to a record, including images, are
> "better" suited if organized and saved in one place.
And if your database like mine crashs then you have lost all...
Restoring a Database of 1,8 TByte takes some hours!!!
No one restore a database of 1,8 TByte in less then one hour.
I have my database and currently 1 FileServer with the binary files.
(I will switch to 3 FileServers of 2U insteed of one 6U)
> I did the same thing including merging a copyright on the image. I
> believe that saving all related data in a dB is really the "right"
> way to go. From there, you can do anything you want with the data.
Served from a filesystem too
The overhead form getting a pic from the database is bigger then
from a filesystem. I had allready tried it. I can resize on the
fly too. Now, where is the problem, if a php script get the pic
from a filserver using http or ftp?
My system is
pgsql.example.com
/ (maybve a cluster)
client ---------> www.example.com
\
bin1.example.com
bin2.example.com
Greetings
Michelle Konzack
--
Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/
##################### Debian GNU/Linux Consultant #####################
Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886
50, rue de Soultz MSM LinuxMichi
0033/6/61925193 67100 Strasbourg/France IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com)
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
