Posted by Jerry Stuckle on 02/02/07 17:56

AlterEgo wrote:

>
> Also in my posting I said to store the images in a hive folder structure
> (unbalanced tree), not in one directory - jeez! If you choose to use UUID's
> (GUIDs) as filenames, you get a remakably balanced tree - at least up
> through the first 12 characters.
>

Yep, and as you add new directories you need to keep changing the code.
And it creates a management nightmare. What happens when you want to
delete an image? Is it used by anything, for instance?

> If scaling isn't an issue, by all means store images in a database. If it is
> an issue, then I'll side with the big boys and store them in a file system.
> They know a little bit about implementing technology.
>

The "big boys" do store images in databases. We used to do it all the
way back in the 80's on mainframes - for instance, scanned documents.
And we did it for big companies (I was working for IBM at the time). It
scales quite well.

Don't tell me it doesn't scale when you haven't tried it. I have. And
it does - quite well.

> Top poster and always will be, sorry.
>
> -- Bill

That says it all.
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================

[Back to original message]