Posted by d on 04/13/06 19:53

"Gerry Vandermaesen" <gerry.vandermaesen@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1144934307.067941.274930@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
> Storing images in a database can be quite appropriate if the record and
> the image are considered a single entity.
>
> This way your application doesn't need to bother with storing the
> images on the filesystem, and for example deleting them when you delete
> or update the record. You also are sure your images don't get deleted
> from the filesystem while they are still being referenced in a database
> record.

So it's a case of slowing down the user's experience because the coder was
too lazy to figure out how to link files to database records accurately? :)

> So even if you trade in some DB performance for this design, in some
> cases it still can be justified.

I've not yet heard a good reason ;)

> fletch wrote:
>> > Sure - there are very good reasons for keeping images in the database.
>> > I also
>> > do it when appropriate.
>>
>> You can't leave it there! What are they!
>

[Back to original message]