At 12:18 AM +0200 5/14/06, Michelle Konzack wrote:
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.
-snip-
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?
Well... if you define the problem in terms of "If it can be done"
then there's no real problem.
But the purpose of programming is to gather, organize, process, and
display data. We do this under the paradigm of "keep it simple" --
the simpler is usually the better.
I only said that from a programming perspective -- of collecting and
placing data into organizable groups -- keeping things in one system
is preferable (simpler) than dividing things up into different
organizational elements (i.e., file system v dB).
Plus, a dB has search capabilities that a file system doesn't --
that's probably the reason why dB's came into existence, right?
As for overhead and time to process stuff -- that's just a current
observation and the "problem" (if there is one) will most certainly
pass.
I think the future on this is pretty clear as to what regime will be
preferable for data organization. Not that I'm implying such to you,
I remember DOS types saying "What moron will ever use a mouse?" and
now they're saying "Only Idiots and Morons place images in dB's".
To each their own.
tedd
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.com
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
