> I started that way too John, but once apps I have written > needed to be deployed over a wan, and have a web interface as well, the > the idea of path and filename being stored flew right out the window.. > Blobs (on a server are a really nice place to all sorts of > interesting sorts of data, like voice messages, auto cad drawings, jpg, VfP > applications, xml files, screen shots. You name it,
Doesn't the Blob field type aggregate all of it's data into a single .FPT file (and 2gb limit) per table? Please tell me no, but that's what I'm seeing in the doc. I favor the association of files with tables using naming convention mentioned by Peter. This way the app can be given a drive or a folder to scan for associated content. While it leads to proliferation of files, there is no size limit and the user has a greater deal of access and control over the files that do exist. I guess it depends on the application, so it's nice to have choices. Bill > Bob Lee _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
