Not really a Rails question, but a "best practices" one. If I want to associate an image to every account in my application, is it better to insert the image file directly inside the db or to upload the image in public/images/ ? Also, if I want to associate a cover to a movie, what's the best approach ? TIA, ngw -- Nicholas Wieland email@example.com ___________________________________ Yahoo! Messenger with Voice: chiama da PC a telefono a tariffe esclusive http://it.messenger.yahoo.com
on 2006-03-08 02:45
on 2006-03-08 05:09
Nicholas Wieland wrote: > Not really a Rails question, but a "best practices" one. > If I want to associate an image to every account in my application, is > it better to insert the image file directly inside the db or to upload > the image in public/images/ ? > Also, if I want to associate a cover to a movie, what's the best > approach ? As with all good design question the answer is, "it depends" Most of the file upload plugins and help you find for Rails is built around the filesystem, so for ease of use sake that makes sense. If you want a guide for how to work directly with the database I posted instructions on my blog here: http://jroller.com/page/bloritsch?entry=saving_ima... Now, to answer your question. The whole "it depends" answer hinges on how you plan on growing. The Rails model of growth is to add more machines to handle the load. It's a reasonable way to go, as evidenced by Google, Yahoo, etc. As you add more boxes you need to get at the images. If you stored your images in the database, as your ISP handles upgrading the database (usually with a SAN or something) you have to change nothing. It's all there, ready and waiting. If you stored your images in the filesystem, you have a new challenge. Either you need to use a networked drive to house the application and let other machines read that drive, or you need to use a SAN for the application. The issue here is throughput. If you have a dozen machines all trying to read and write files from one, then you have a serious bottleneck. In reality, by the time you need to start distributing load across multiple machines a SAN is probably in your near future. (SAN: Storage Area Network) Whether its for the database or the file system, SANs can distribute your storage needs across multiple physical locations and look like one really huge drive. All of the clustering and distributing is done behind the scenes. My personal opinion is that storing the images in the database gives me that extra level of security blanket feeling. Its transactional (with the exception of certain legacy table types in MySQL), which means I never get a partially saved file. It's also usually easy to back up and restore as those are functions are built into the database anyway. Lastly, all my data is in one place so it makes it easier for me to manage. As with all things YMMV.
on 2006-03-08 10:59
Il giorno 08/mar/06, alle ore 05:08, Berin Loritsch ha scritto: > CUT Thank you very much, everything is much more clear now. -- Nicholas Wieland firstname.lastname@example.org ___________________________________ Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi e allegati da 10MB http://mail.yahoo.it
on 2006-03-08 14:11
Nicholas, - Next to what Berin told you, the simple/Rails way is to 1°/store images in the file system with 2°/ the file_column plugin. - As you're asking for "best practices", if you don't have the user picture for a given account, I'd go for displaying a silhouette rather than showing a blank frame. Alain