Re: Filesystem vs. Postgres for images

From: Cott Lang <cott(at)internetstaff(dot)com>
To: Michal Hlavac <hlavki(at)medium13(dot)sk>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Filesystem vs. Postgres for images
Date: 2004-04-13 12:40:34
Message-ID: 1081860033.2112.12.camel@localhost
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Tue, 2004-04-13 at 01:44, Michal Hlavac wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am working on web portal. There are some ads. We have about 200 000
> ads. Every ad have own directory called ID, where is 5 subdirectories
> with various sizes of 5 images.
>
> Filesystem is too slow. But I don't know, if I store these images into
> postgres, performace will grow.

Consider breaking your directories up, i.e.:

/ads/(ID % 1000)/ID

I use that for a system with several million images, works great. I
really don't think putting them in the database will do anything
positive for you. :)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeremiah Jahn 2004-04-13 13:40:32 Re: Filesystem vs. Postgres for images
Previous Message Victor Spång Arthursson 2004-04-13 12:17:27 convert result to uppercase