I started working on a side project during the night. And it requires me to use large amounts of images, similar to Instagram, what do you recommend using as a database for this?
Should I upload the file to a path and referenced it from the database? Or should I use another type of database and upload the pictures there?
Thanks
"Should I upload the file to a path and referenced it from the database" - yes. Storing objects in mysql like that as a blob is bad practice. Put them in a directory somewhere and reference the path from your database of choice.. mysql is fine.
It won't be a good idea to store image directly in DB. DB size will increase. DB Hit will increase. So better store image as file in server and store the reference path in DB.
For Detailed Info :- Storing Images in DB - Yea or Nay?
Related
I am working on a social networking site and i would like some help. I want the users of the site to upload images on mysql database. (I am using jsp pages). Any ideas?
You can, although it's generally a bad idea.
It's better to store the images somewhere on your server and store the image's path in the database instead, where you can save it along with other data (e.g. information regarding the uploading user).
If you insist, store it using this type:
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/blob.html
Here's an example.
I'm creating a mobile app that views articles. These articles are just simple html with a couple of images each. I am currently storing everything in a database. Later, I will need to save the articles locally to the device in an easy format. For this reason, I have opted to store the Base64 images within the database, using a Data URI Scheme (look here for info http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_URI_scheme).
My question is: is it okay to store this much data in one database entry? I have a table that is ONLY for these large records, with article meta data tables that point to these. Would it be better if I used TEXT fields, rather than BLOBs?
If it helps, I am using MySQL with the InnoDB engine.
Avoiding using the db to store images is a good practice, keeping the images in the db not only slows down your db performance it also increases it size and backups, if you are using cloud service then there is also the cost issue.
Use S3 or Azure for this purpose and have only the url of the images in your db.Files may be uploaded directly to to the storage service reducing load on your db server. The only thing left to do is for your mobile application to connect both this services(db and the Images service),i found this web tool to manage my mobile app db because it connect to my Images cloud service which is Azure but i think they also support Amazon S3.
Another option would be to store images in something like:
Amazon S3
and then just have a field in your database that stored the url for each image.
As long as you dont have a DB as big as facebook or similar it should be fine.
It is best to store just the path to the image and the image themselves in a folder.
hope that helps
You could also look into Azure Blob Storage. I've been using it and it's working very well.
i'm developing an android app where the user can take a photo. The app will have to upload it. I'm new of servers/databases. What's better? Store the image file "image.jpg" on the server or store the image string, encoded with base64, in MySQL db?
Are there other strategies?
CONSIDER THAT i will have to reload the image to visualize it on the phone.
i think better way is to store the images in a folder on the server and store their link in database..
Reasons
1) Normally time required to perform file operations is less than time required to perform database operations.
2) Updating the image is easy because its stored in file system which prevents the update operation on database which takes more time.
I think it is not a good idea to store image string in database instead of just its path (image name). Store your image on server and its name or path in database. Because retrieving image string from db and creating image for it each time you need that image is expensive. So better store its name only in server.
Is it possible to store .doc/.txt or image files to stroe in database directly making attributes of type blob?I neewd a good working example for storing files inside database and also obviously retrieving them from database as original.
The blog entry http://mirificampress.com/permalink/saving_a_file_into_mysql describes the overall process in quite allot of detail for php.
I have to display images on website and I can store image in the folder on my website and also I can store the image in image column of SQL Server.
So which way of storing image is better : in folder or in Image column of SQL Server.
1. Which way of storing image and retrieving it is faster
With SQL Server 2008, while you can store BLOB data, it's best to avoid it. I've done it in the past, grudgingly, and it did have negative performance implications. Unless you have some constraint which prevents it, use the file system. That's what it's built for, and it's much faster.
As #Martin Smith pointed out you could use FileStream. We started storing our files using FileStream so that we could also add full-text indexing and allow the users to not only search the data, but the files on our site. It is also nice because we can easily move our files along with teh Database to other environments (Dev, Test).
nice file stream Article: Here
Also, please use varbinary(max) if you are going to store in the DB. The image column is going to be deprecated in future versions.
--S