Re: images in database

On Thu, 3 Apr 2003, Shridhar Daithankar wrote:

> On Thursday 03 April 2003 17:38, you wrote:
> >
> > In the end, we went with large objects because my tests showed them faster
> > than bytea and there could be large sized objects, a B64 encoding would
> > bloat the size (encode/decode time and size bloat were what slowed the
> > bytea down I think) and the large objects let us extract the file in
> > portions for streaming should we wish.
>
>
> Just wondering, how does it exactly differ from storing an image in a file and
> storing the filename in the database?
>

Well it's in the database is the principal difference. There's a central
storage location, the client doesn't need to run on the same machine, the
client doesn't need to manage a filesystem, pg_dump can back up everything
(although I haven't actually tested this yet and I seem to remember someone
reporting a restore problem).

The file system option was one we considered.

--
Nigel J. Andrews