Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!novia!news-out.readnews.com!news-xxxfer.readnews.com!news-out.news.tds.net!newsreading01.news.tds.net!86597e80!not-for-mail From: "Jeffrey H. Coffield" Subject: Re: In need of advise abo Message-ID: <9kMWj.4567$nl7.3933@flpi146.ffdc.sbc.com> X-Comment-To: comp.lang.java.databases Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.databases In-Reply-To: <482b7aac$0$90270$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> References: <482b7aac$0$90270$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=IBM437 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Gateway: time.synchro.net [Synchronet 3.15a-Win32 NewsLink 1.92] Lines: 41 Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 15:21:49 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 96.60.20.240 X-Complaints-To: news@tds.net X-Trace: newsreading01.news.tds.net 1303917709 96.60.20.240 (Wed, 27 Apr 2011 10:21:49 CDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 10:21:49 CDT Organization: TDS.net Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.databases:114 To: comp.lang.java.databases Arne Vajhoj wrote: > Jeffrey H. Coffield wrote: >> mebe wrote: >>> i am working on a project where users are able to submit any ammount >>> of large binary files. >>> Currently all data is stored in a MySql database, but i am uncertain >>> if it would be better/more efficient/faster to store the binary files >>> on the filesystem. This would certainly save MySql from a lot of work, >>> but ensuring data integrity could become complicated. >>> I am uncertain if it is a good idea to move the binary data out of the >>> database, so i appreciate any information. >>> Thanks in advance. >> >> Aside from direct performance questions, also consider what it would >> take to back up and restore the database. If the large blobs don't >> change much (archiving documents/images) then storing the data in >> files and using an incremental backup scheme could be much more >> efficient. > > I think backup is an argument for storing in database. > > To do backup and restore of both database and file system that > need to match adds complexity to the procedures. > > Arne True, but when there are close to a terabyte of images that are archived (write once, read seldom) we do an incremental backup of only what's added. If it was in the database, you would have to back up the whole thing. If a restore is ever done, the database can be up quickly while the old images are restored. Jeff C --- * Synchronet * The Whitehouse BBS --- whitehouse.hulds.com --- check it out free usenet! --- Synchronet 3.15a-Win32 NewsLink 1.92 Time Warp of the Future BBS - telnet://time.synchro.net:24