SQL Image Data vs FileSystem

SQL Image Data vs FileSystem

Post by Chris Torgerso » Thu, 20 Feb 2003 00:15:40



Let's say I have a messaging type app that allows documents(generally pdf or
word) to be transmitted with a requirement to keep a history of all the
documents sent.(possibly for retrieval well into the future).

My question is

a)is the DB or filesystem a better storage medium(note using SQL Server 2000
and Windows 2000)
and
b)any particular reasons for choosing one over the other.

Really I'm most interested in if there is a good argument for not storing
the document data in the DB.

Here's some background to help in addressing my question(s).  Basically I
have a service that receives the transfer request and logs it to the DB.  A
second process reads from the DB to transfer the message/document.  This is
the only time the document data will be read unless the need arises to
reconstruct a particular message(this should be rare, but necessary to
support).

The service logging the request may be a process on one server or could be
implemented across multiple servers(possibly as a webservice).

Any insight/suggestions/comments would be appreciated.  Thanks.

Chris Torgerson

 
 
 

SQL Image Data vs FileSystem

Post by Joel Aske » Thu, 20 Feb 2003 01:44:27


Chris:

In this instance, I would store the documents in the database based on your
requirement for future retrieval.

Decoupling them into a file system primarily has the negative effect of
distributing control of your data integrity between two essentially
uncoordinated entities ( SQL Server , NTFS file system ).


Quote:> Let's say I have a messaging type app that allows documents(generally pdf
or
> word) to be transmitted with a requirement to keep a history of all the
> documents sent.(possibly for retrieval well into the future).

> My question is

> a)is the DB or filesystem a better storage medium(note using SQL Server
2000
> and Windows 2000)
> and
> b)any particular reasons for choosing one over the other.

> Really I'm most interested in if there is a good argument for not storing
> the document data in the DB.

> Here's some background to help in addressing my question(s).  Basically I
> have a service that receives the transfer request and logs it to the DB.
A
> second process reads from the DB to transfer the message/document.  This
is
> the only time the document data will be read unless the need arises to
> reconstruct a particular message(this should be rare, but necessary to
> support).

> The service logging the request may be a process on one server or could be
> implemented across multiple servers(possibly as a webservice).

> Any insight/suggestions/comments would be appreciated.  Thanks.

> Chris Torgerson


 
 
 

1. storing images in SQL Server vs. filesystem

I'm trying to get together a database for an online casting service.  With
that, I'll have to show photos of actors and so forth.  I keep hearing
different opinions about where I should store my photos.  I have been told
to keep them under a separate directory on the hard drive and merely provide
a reference to it in the database itself.  I've also heard that I should
keep everything in the database itself.

Anyone know of any stats to back up either claim as being better?  Also, if
I do store the images in the SQL Server 7.0 database, is BLOB the choice I
want?  Thanks in advance.

Mike

2. "Double-Click" on upper left to quit FoxPro Application??

3. Image Data vs Image Link

4. challenging query

5. Gif images: Database or filesystem?

6. Insert and retrive a file form "Image" datatype column

7. Storing Images in Blobs versus Storing in Filesystem - Performance Issues

8. US-CA- Software Developer- Engineeer

9. Insert OLE Objects from Filesystem into image

10. Images in Database vs. Link to Image

11. Disk storage : filesystem vs database

12. FileSystem vs. DB