Timeline for Creating a separate table for images or adding "image fields" to many tables?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 3, 2020 at 21:52 | history | edited | Deduplicator | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
fixed username and updated links
|
| Apr 19, 2017 at 3:01 | comment | added | Bryan 'BJ' Hoffpauir Jr. | @Basilevs Modern object stores like S3 are just a better soluiont to the problem, but before they were mature BLOBS were the only option... Replication of objects is faster & more stable given lower complexity vs ACID compliant SQL transactions & native cache server http protocol support adds more advantages... Varnish is an intermediary origin in my eample above effectively pulling objects out of the stream to cache them in RAM, eliminating file system latency & lock contention delays that pthreads can introduce. | |
| Apr 17, 2017 at 18:21 | comment | added | TheCatWhisperer | Non relational data (images) do not belong in relational databases. Argue all you want from a conceptual point of view, but your application performance will suffer. | |
| Apr 17, 2017 at 18:10 | comment | added | Basilevs | I don't see how using BLOB prevents me from using caching CDN or other tools listed. DB can be used as source of truth, while other components are just various caches, which could not care less about original storage. | |
| Apr 17, 2017 at 17:59 | comment | added | TheCatWhisperer | +1, even without a CDN, why would you want to destroy your DB's performance with long image reads? DBs are the hardest application elements to scale. | |
| Apr 12, 2017 at 7:31 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://programmers.stackexchange.com/ with https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Mar 10, 2015 at 22:47 | history | answered | Bryan 'BJ' Hoffpauir Jr. | CC BY-SA 3.0 |