Thread: storing files: blob, toasted text of filesystem?
Hello everyone, Sorry if this is a FAQ, but I've groups.googled the subject and can't find a definite answer (if such a thing exists). I'm working on a db in postgresql on a debian stable server, ext3 filesystem. The db will contain files, not too many (I expect somewehere between 10 and 100 files max to be inserted daily), and not too big (mostly pdf files, some images. The size will rarely be larger than 1Mb). My plan was to store the files in the db as BLOBs, which seemed the most elegant solution because these files are logically related to objects that are in the db (customers, people etc.) Recently someone warned me that this would have a large performance impact on the db and said it's better to store the files on the filesystem and keep some sort of pointer in the db. Google was contradictory, some people even had performance problems when using the filesystem/pointer approach and went to BLOBs for that reason. Can anyone tell me (or point me in the right direction) what is the best way to do this, BLOBs / filesystem+pointer / toasted text? Thanks!
Hi there, Joolz; On Sun, 3 Oct 2004 10:48:25 +0200 (CEST) "Joolz" <joolz@arbodienst-limburg.nl> wrote: > Google was contradictory, some people even had performance > problems when using the filesystem/pointer approach and went to > BLOBs for that reason. Can anyone tell me (or point me in the > right direction) what is the best way to do this, BLOBs / > filesystem+pointer / toasted text? Though not running postgresql for that solution: We are running an enterprise-scaled document management system to keep track of currently > 2*10^3 documents (mostly *.hpgl and *.plt files, some *.pdfs and *.zips in between), and the (proprietary) dms software we are using for that purpose exclusively relies on the filesystem+pointer approach instead of storing all the files inside the tablespace of the database. Even while the current system is in migration due to some severe limits of the current setup (Windows NT 4 servers running an old MSSQL...:/ ), by now this concept seems to work well there even with both a database and a filesystem which don't really go for top performance. Hope this helps, have a nice weekend. Kris -- Kristian Rink -- Programmierung/Systembetreuung planConnect GmbH * Strehlener Str. 12 - 14 * 01069 Dresden 0351 4657702 * 0176 24472771 * krink@pm-planc.de
On Sun, 3 Oct 2004 12:34:57 +0200 Kristian Rink <krink@pm-planc.de> wrote: > Though not running postgresql for that solution: We are running an > enterprise-scaled document management system to keep track of > currently > 2*10^3 documents (mostly *.hpgl and *.plt files, some ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Should be "2*10^6", of course - messing with 2000 files probably ain't that challenging after all... Cheers, Kris -- Kristian Rink -- Programmierung/Systembetreuung planConnect GmbH * Strehlener Str. 12 - 14 * 01069 Dresden 0351 4657702 * 0176 24472771 * krink@pm-planc.de