Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
My client have created a script in php+mysql that saves images directly in the database and every images has url like this: http://www.example.com/image.php?id=421
In your opinion this is a very wrong solution ? Should I rebuild all the site ?
There are about 1000 visits per day and about 600 images in the database.
Images files are files, unless there is compelling reason to store them in the database, the place they belong is the file system, where you get benefits like easy backup and replication, distributed across multiple machines, directly served by the webserver, and all the last-modified-date and etag supported by the webserver to achieve better performance, etc.
if the number of images is expected to grow, and different sizes of one image are expected to be created (e.g. thumbnail images etc.) in the coming release, a plan to migrate images from db to file system is strongly suggested.