I have a client who wants to be able to upload images to his website for his customers to access. It will probably max out at 100 images a month...so not a huge amount of data. I am using asp.net 2.0 and SQL Server 2005.
Does anyone have thoughts or opinions on why I should or should not take this approach?
You could store images on disk or you could store images in SQL server.
It would seem that SQL would require more overhead than Disk so...
Does SQL offer you something that you require that disk storage does not?
If it does, then use it. Pulling images from a db is not an uncommon practice. The small performance drop could be mitigated by caching the images (in-memory for small images or disk for large images).
If nothing you are doing actually requires SQL server though, i would stick to disk.
|||I would use SQL Server. It simplifies quite a bit, and you don't have to give users write permissions any where on the web server making it more secure.|||I am already using sql server for other reasons so I wouldn't be setting it up specifically for this. Also I would think that sql server would organize the files for you, where they live and whatnot, thus less that I would have to deal with from a programmatic standpoint, not to mention the directory permissions as mentioned above. The images that will be stored will be a little larger than a business card.
Thanks for your responses..
No comments:
Post a Comment