I believe 1.6 has a binary field, no need for an external solution, but
again, do you really need to store the image in the DB? for most cases
ImageField is enough, it stores the path so apache/nginx can serve the
image directly
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 4:30 PM, Javier Guerra Giraldez
wrote:
> On
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 8:57 AM, m1chael wrote:
> People have always recommended to me that storing images directly in a
> database is a bad idea.
it IS a bad idea, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be possible.
there are several Storage subclasses that do that, and it's not hard
to do another
Why you want to save your images directly on your database?
+1 to m1chael say
2013/11/12 m1chael
> People have always recommended to me that storing images directly in a
> database is a bad idea.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Leslie Jeffries
> wrote:
> > Have you looked at this dja
People have always recommended to me that storing images directly in a
database is a bad idea.
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Leslie Jeffries
wrote:
> Have you looked at this django add-on?
> https://pypi.python.org/pypi/django-db-file-storage
>
>
> On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 3:12:14 AM UT
Have you looked at this django add-on?
https://pypi.python.org/pypi/django-db-file-storage
On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 3:12:14 AM UTC-5, ckg...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> I would like to store images directly into the database i have been trying
> this but does not seem to help or i may be doing it i
I would like to store images directly into the database i have been trying
this but does not seem to help or i may be doing it in the wrong way''
models.py
from database_storage import DatabaseStorage
DB_FILES = {
'table': 'files',
'base_url': '/blog/attach/',
}
class Img(
6 matches
Mail list logo
