| From: | Jorge Godoy <jgodoy(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | John McCawley <nospam(at)hardgeus(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Clodoaldo <clodoaldo(dot)pinto(dot)neto(at)gmail(dot)com>, imageguy <imageguy1206(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Database versus filesystem for storing images |
| Date: | 2007-01-05 20:26:51 |
| Message-ID: | 873b6pjk38.fsf@gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
John McCawley <nospam(at)hardgeus(dot)com> writes:
> Don't store your images in the database. Store them on the filesystem and
> store their path in the database. Anyone that tells you otherwise is a stark
> raving madman :)
>
> My system is very heavily used, and our pg_dump is only a few gigs. Meanwhile
> our images/documents storage is well over a hundred gigs. I'd hate to think
> that I'd have to dump and restore 100 gigs every time I wanted to dump the
> newest data to the development database.
How do you plan your backup routine and how do you guarantee that on a failure
all needed data is restored? I mean, how do you handle integrity with data
outside the database?
--
Jorge Godoy <jgodoy(at)gmail(dot)com>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Chernow | 2007-01-05 20:49:28 | Re: Database versus filesystem for storing images |
| Previous Message | James Neff | 2007-01-05 20:26:45 | Re: Database versus filesystem for storing images |