On Mon, May 15, 2006 10:18 am, tedd wrote: > crash It DOES make a difference as to how fast you can restore the DB and the images, and more importantly, the PERCEIVED time for your site to be "back up" If you can get your DB up fast, but the images aren't available, MOST sites, other than, like, "flickr" or whatever it is, are considered by most visitors to be "up" > Plus, a dB has search capabilities that a file system doesn't -- > that's probably the reason why dB's came into existence, right? After you start working for the CIA and actually write a function that *DOES* something with the blob data to search for common facial features or something, you can use this argument... Until then, it's really rather empty. :-) :-):-) > 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. The DB adds layers of overhead, almost always. The only time it doesn't, is when you've got teeny tiny images, and not very many of them, such as, say, the nav buttons on your site, and that's from caching in the DB layer more than anything else. > 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". -- Like Music? http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
