Re: Database versus filesystem for storing images - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Ragnar
Subject Re: Database versus filesystem for storing images
Date
Msg-id 1168039464.6369.523.camel@localhost.localdomain
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Database versus filesystem for storing images  (Andrew Chernow <pg-job@esilo.com>)
Responses Re: Database versus filesystem for storing images  (Andrew Chernow <pg-job@esilo.com>)
Re: Database versus filesystem for storing images  (Jorge Godoy <jgodoy@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-general
On fös, 2007-01-05 at 15:49 -0500, Andrew Chernow wrote:
> I 100% agree.  Use the database as a lookup into the filesystem.  Don't load the
> database up with terabytes of non-searchable binary data?  not sure how that
> would help you?
>

>  >I mean, how do you handle integrity with data
>  > outside the database?
> You don't, the file system handles integrity of the stored data.  Although, one
> must careful to avoid db and fs orphans.  Meaning, a record with no
> corresponding file or a file with no corresponging record.  Always
> write()/insert an image file to the system within a transaction, including
> writing the image out to the fs.  Make sure to unlink any paritally written
> image files.

what happens if you rollback a transaction that just updated
an image file?

for that matter, what happens if one transaction is using or
even reading an image while another is updating it?

gnari



pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Wes
Date:
Subject: Re: Index vacuum improvements in 8.2
Next
From: John McCawley
Date:
Subject: Re: GUI tool that can reverse engineering schemas