Thanks, the datatypes are going to be varied, but I am sure the sizes are the things I need to consider.
Mike On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 8:27 PM, P Kishor <[email protected]> wrote: > If you have a lot of tiny images, especially if the images can be > smaller than a page size in the db, then storing them in the db would > be very efficient. If you have very large images then storing their > path in the db, and keeping the images on the fs would be better. > > If you do keep your images on the file system, you will have to devise > some method for naming and storing them... they will have to have a > uniquely accessible path, and dumping them all in one folder will slow > down access after a few hundred, perhaps a few thousand. In the db, on > the other hand, you can just store the images in a separate table and > assign them a primary key, then join them to your main attributes > table. > > For most applications, it may not matter much, but when you are > dealing with either very large size images, or very large number of > images then one or the other system might be more suitable. > _______________________________________________ > sqlite-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users > -- Peace may sound simple—one beautiful word— but it requires everything we have, every quality, every strength, every dream, every high ideal. —Yehudi Menuhin (1916–1999), musician _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list [email protected] http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
