Re: Seeking advice on database table design for storing - Mailing list pgsql-general

From chris.gamble@CPBINC.com
Subject Re: Seeking advice on database table design for storing
Date
Msg-id 00CA54A79070D411A9E20090273CEF1C14F941@inet1.cpbinc.com
Whole thread Raw
List pgsql-general
As an explanation of wanting to use the db:
The application is client/server that is distributed over various internal
links. There is no common file sharing available, and it would seem that
managing an extra security layer for file store would be an excessive
addition for the it guys. So I'm using some of past karma to hope that my
plan is workable if not the most efficient.

> -----Original Message-----
> From:    Dennis Gearon [SMTP:gearond@cvc.net]
> Sent:    Friday, February 07, 2003 10:45 AM
> To:    pgsql-general@postgresql.org; chris.gamble@CPBINC.com
> Subject:    Re: [GENERAL] Seeking advice on database table design for
> storing images
>
> It's faster to store the images in the file system, and the path/filename
> in the database.
>
> For one thing, the file system itself is just faster.
> You would have to provide the client's browser with a URL for the image,
> and feed that through
> some sort of switchyard script application, when with a filesystem based
> image, you just specifiy
> where it is and let apache worry about it.
>
> The only real advantage to putting images in the database, or hiding them
> behind another name in
> the document tree and using a switchyard application to redirect the image
> request is to protect
> your image directory and images from any use but in your site's documents
> (until they are
> downloaded once)
>
> 2/7/2003 8:18:56 AM, chris.gamble@CPBINC.com wrote:
>
> >I am working on an application that will store images with every product
> >ordered from a given company. Doing this type of application on other
> >databases, I have always been told to use a seperate table for the image
> >store. Doing this has given me the table designs listed below. My
> question
> >is: Is it within the design of postgres 7.3 to store 30k to 1mb images in
> a
> >bytea field, and if so can the two tables below be joined into a single
> >table without suffering adverse effects?
> >
> >TABLE - tdatInvoiceLineItems
> >invoiceid   int8
> >productid  int4
> >quantityordered  int4
> >samplestocustomer  int4
> >adcost  numeric  10,4
> >adheight  float4  4
> >adwidth  float4  4
> >workorderid  int8
> >objectid  int8  8
> >needsart  bool
> >
> >TABLE - tdatCustomerArt
> >lineitemid   int8
> >artwork  bytea
> >extension  varchar
> >
> >
> >Chris Gamble
> >CPB Inc
> >p: 972-579-1642 x 22
> >f: 972-579-1355
> >
> >
> >
> >---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> >TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
> >
> >http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
> >
>
>

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Dennis Gearon
Date:
Subject: Re: Seeking advice on database table design for storing images
Next
From: Chris Travers
Date:
Subject: Re: inherited, unique serial field...