Re: [SL] Associate scanned images with invoice?

[Mark B. <ma...@ga...>]

On Mon, Dec 04, 2006 at 02:42:39PM -0500, C. Duncan Hudson wrote:

> I never understand the argument about storing images / blobs in
> the database.  Yes, they are big.  Yes, they do take up alot of
> space.  But if you don't store them in the database, and you
> end up storing them on a share somewhere what are you saving?
> Just the overhead of the indices?  Maybe a little more.

I don't know how database caching works, but I would guess that
if the average bytes per row of query result went up from .5K to
30K (because each row has a blob), db performance would suffer,
as you could store 1/60th as much data in a cache.  

In any case, for db performance is not the lowest hanging fruit
for SL performance.

m