> Which filesystems? I know ext2 used to have issues with many-thousands
> of files in one directory, but that was a directory scanning issue
> rather than file reading.
From my Point of view i think it is better to let one Process do the
operation to an Postgres Cluster Filestructure as
if i bypass it with a second process.
For example:
A User loads up some JPEG Images over HTTP.
a) (Filesystem)
On Filesystem it would be written in a File with a random generated
Filename (timestamp or what ever)
(the Directory Expands and over a Million Fileobjects with will be
archived, written, replaced, e.t.c)
b) (Database)
The JPEG Image Information will be stored into a BLOB as Part of a
special Table, where is linked
wit the custid of the primary Usertable.
From my Point of view is any outside Process (must be created, forked,
Memory allocated, e.t.c)
a bad choice. I think it is generall better to Support the Postmaster in
all Ways and do some
Hardware RAID Configurations.
>> My Question:
>> Can i speedup my Webapplication if i store my JPEG Images with small
>> sizes inside my PostgreSQL Database (on verry large Databasis over 1
>> GByte
>> and above without Images at this time!)
>
>
> No. Otherwise the filesystem people would build their filesystems on
> top of PostgreSQL not the other way around. Of course, if you want
> image updates to be part of a database transaction, then it might be
> worth storing them in the database.
Hmm, ORACLE is going the other Way. All File Objects can be stored into
the Database if the DB
has the IFS Option (Database Filesystem and Fileserver insinde the
Database).
>
>> I hope some Peoples can give me a Tip or Hint where in can
>> some usefull Information about it!
>
> Look into having a separate server (process or actual hardware) to
> handle requests for static text and images. Keep the Java server for
> actually processing
Thanks
