On Tue, 2 Jul 2002 05:45:40 +0200
"Andy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> is the increase of the network traffic noticable? The query is pretty small
> just text. Do u really think this might increase the traffic?
Try to heavely charge a DB with images inside it.
Do the same without DB, that depends
>the blob field can't be indexed but others (id, filename, keywords,
>caption etc..) can, there's lots of cases where it makes sense to put
>images in a database.
This makes no sense to me.
You would still index the filename, the keywords, the caption, make them all
searchable, but you do *NOT*
>I also noticed that the image is not cached anymore. Is this true for all
>blobs, or do I just access them in a wron way?
Your browser is only going to cache URLs without a ? in them, probably
maybe...
Or, less likely, your PHP code with the MySQL code may be sending out
different headers() ab
i also noticed that the images are not cached at all. The other images
comming from the FS are cached just fine. Do u think thats because of the
blob?
Andy
"Mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
On Mon, 1 Jul 2002 14:20:30 +0200, Pierre-Al
On Mon, 1 Jul 2002 14:20:30 +0200, Pierre-Alain Joye wrote:
>On Mon, 1 Jul 2002 14:17:53 +0200
>"andy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Hi there,
>>
>>I am wondering if anybody has experiance in saving images to blob
>>in mysql.
>>
>>I do save images with 1 K and 4 KB to blob fields while I used to
is the increase of the network traffic noticable? The query is pretty small
just text. Do u really think this might increase the traffic?
I also noticed that the image is not cached anymore. Is this true for all
blobs, or do I just access them in a wron way?
(I am requesting a php file in the sc
On Mon, 1 Jul 2002 11:24:31 -0700
"Lazor, Ed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Aren't you saying that storing files on the local file system is generally
> faster than using database blobs?
In most cases I meet (mysql, pgsql and oracle), the filesystem methods were faster on
Linux and Solaris syst
Aren't you saying that storing files on the local file system is generally
faster than using database blobs?
There are enough examples in the article and related threads to convince me
that benefits to database blobs are more than exceptions to the rule. In
fact, there are even examples where d
On Mon, 1 Jul 2002 09:35:37 -0700
"Lazor, Ed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There are benefits to this making the performance hit worthwhile in some
> instances.
Sure, the exceptions rules :).
I am not sure about your answer. The article where you pointed me does not go against
what we said, a
There are benefits to this making the performance hit worthwhile in some
instances.
More info:
http://www.zend.com/zend/trick/tricks-sept-2001.php
-Original Message-
Inserting images or whatever binary data in a database does not have much
sense
**
On Mon, 1 Jul 2002 14:17:53 +0200
"andy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I am wondering if anybody has experiance in saving images to blob in mysql.
>
> I do save images with 1 K and 4 KB to blob fields while I used to save them
> to file. It seams to me that this is much slower acce
11 matches
Mail list logo