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

From Bruno Wolff III
Subject Re: Database versus filesystem for storing images
Date
Msg-id 20070105215159.GA2135@wolff.to
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Database versus filesystem for storing images  (James Neff <jneff@tethyshealth.com>)
Responses Re: Database versus filesystem for storing images  ("Jeremy Haile" <jhaile@fastmail.fm>)
List pgsql-general
On Fri, Jan 05, 2007 at 15:26:45 -0500,
  James Neff <jneff@tethyshealth.com> wrote:
> "... and Moses said unto them, 'The eleventh commandment :  thou shalt
> store images in a database!'..."
>
> What if you had another database where you stored just the images and
> not back it up if you don't want to?

I think the main reason to keep images in the database is if you need
transactional semantics. If you are updating images and transactions that
started before the update, need to see the old version you are going to
want them in the database. I suspect this need isn't very common though.

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Gavin Hamill
Date:
Subject: Re: vacuum v. vacuumdb
Next
From: "Raymond O'Donnell"
Date:
Subject: Slony across platforms