Geek asks and answers

Storing a large number of images in a database? Good experience?

I am writing an application that will store a large number of images (and, possibly, videos). Once they are uploaded, they will be immediately pushed to some CDN cloud services for actual delivery to the public. The idea is that the images are stored in a reliable storage with backup storage. I would expect about 200,000 objects up to 10 KB each and possibly fewer video files with a few megabytes.

By default, I would go to Postgres, which offers documentation .

  • Is that a reasonable idea?
  • Will he make a backup of the database a complete nightmare. An experience?
  • Any security issues?
  • Will this affect performance for other parts of db? Keep in mind that db will hit once or twice for each image.
+3
source share
3 answers

Oracle MySQL. . . . , . , 80%, , . , , .

+5

PostgreSQL, ByteA ( BLOB), " " ( , , MySQL PostgreSQL), .

3 , :

  • ? , , ( ) , " " . : Wikimedia .
  • ? " ", SQL, ... PostgreSQL BLOB ( ), BYTEA ( ). .
  • ? - " " " ", , ( !), .

:

  • blob (Binary Large OBject ) : , . . , PostgreSQL, How-tos ..

  • bytea ( blob) (DBlink): , () . bytea, blob . - " - ".

  • (BYTE Array ) : ( , ). , - ( ) . , . - , (, Apache-): , , . , () -, separete , . . PostgreSQL, bytea ..

+3

My experience is limited to the SQL server, but I have several million PDF files that are larger than 10 KB in the database, which still performs pretty well. Of course, indexes are required. A full database backup takes more than expected with so much data. Again, this is for the MS-SQL server!

+2
source

More articles:


All Articles