> The only disadvantage i've had of storing images in DB instead of > Filesystem, is that when you use a PHP script to output the image to a > client browser, MSIE doesn't always accept a suggested filename so it > might try and save it as "your-script.php?img=2". > > Other then that, keeping images in DB is a lot easier since you don't > have to keep your DB in sync with Filesystems ie. Deleted records in DB, > but images still exist. A way I've gotten around this, is that when I dump images into a directory for use by articles in my db, the filename is always name $articleid.filename (since articles and pics are uploaded to the server via php, this is easy to enforce). Thus, when I do kill of articles and what not, I simply remove $articleid.* from my images directory as well. I would strongly argue against stuffing images into a database tho. That's what filesystems are for, and they are way better at it. The overhead alone is reason enough to make you decide against it. -- At no time is freedom of speech more precious than when a man hits his thumb with a hammer. -- Marshall Lumsden Sumbry][ <sumbry@sumbry.com> -- PHP Database Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
