FAQ
Hi list,

[Don't feed the troll: images *will stay* in table(s)]

I've need to store many images (BYTEA): items pictures, items datasheets PDFs
and documents PDFs (suppliers & clients.)

The logical way would be to stuff only one table with these images, however
wouldn't it be faster (in regard to long term accumulation) to have several
images tables (picture, datasheet, supdoc & clidoc) instead?

JY
--

Search Discussions

  • Alan Hodgson at Jun 12, 2011 at 8:24 pm

    On June 12, 2011 12:34:27 PM Jean-Yves F. Barbier wrote:
    The logical way would be to stuff only one table with these images, however
    wouldn't it be faster (in regard to long term accumulation) to have several
    images tables (picture, datasheet, supdoc & clidoc) instead?
    It would definitely make maintenance easier to split them up.

    Big tables are a pain.
  • Jean-Yves F. Barbier at Jun 12, 2011 at 8:36 pm
    On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 13:24:39 -0700, Alan Hodgson wrote:

    Thanks Allan.

    ..
    It would definitely make maintenance easier to split them up.

    Big tables are a pain.


    --
  • Francisco Leovey at Jun 12, 2011 at 8:49 pm
    We only put http links (with other fields with descriptions and dates, etc) to images in the DB, makes backups and maintenance much easier, not to mention updates.

    --- On Sun, 6/12/11, Jean-Yves F. Barbier wrote:


    From: Jean-Yves F. Barbier <12ukwn@gmail.com>
    Subject: Re: [NOVICE] images in one or more tables?
    To: "Alan Hodgson" <ahodgson@simkin.ca>
    Cc: pgsql-novice@postgresql.org
    Date: Sunday, June 12, 2011, 5:36 PM


    On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 13:24:39 -0700, Alan Hodgson wrote:

    Thanks Allan.

    ..
    It would definitely make maintenance easier to split them up.

    Big tables are a pain.


    --

    --
    Sent via pgsql-novice mailing list (pgsql-novice@postgresql.org)
    To make changes to your subscription:
    http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-novice
  • Jean-Yves F. Barbier at Jun 12, 2011 at 9:41 pm

    On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 13:49:12 -0700 (PDT), Francisco Leovey wrote:

    [Don't feed the troll: images *will stay* in table(s)]
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    Can't you read?
    We only put http links (with other fields with descriptions and dates, etc)
    to images in the DB, makes backups and maintenance much easier, not to
    mention updates.

    --- On Sun, 6/12/11, Jean-Yves F. Barbier wrote:


    From: Jean-Yves F. Barbier <12ukwn@gmail.com>
    Subject: Re: [NOVICE] images in one or more tables?
    To: "Alan Hodgson" <ahodgson@simkin.ca>
    Cc: pgsql-novice@postgresql.org
    Date: Sunday, June 12, 2011, 5:36 PM


    On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 13:24:39 -0700, Alan Hodgson wrote:

    Thanks Allan.

    ..
    It would definitely make maintenance easier to split them up.

    Big tables are a pain.

    --
    Smoking is the leading cause of statistics.

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
grouppgsql-novice @
categoriespostgresql
postedJun 12, '11 at 7:34p
activeJun 12, '11 at 9:41p
posts5
users3
websitepostgresql.org
irc#postgresql

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2022 Grokbase