Regarding the 2 Gig limit, that doesn't apply to the size of the blobs,
just the data records. We have a 100 GB database consisting of 3 image
tables and haven't run into any limits. Some tables store the images as
a set file type, some tables store the blob and also the file type so we
can read the data when it is pulled out.

-steve

Adam wrote:

>
> --- In firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:firebird-support%40yahoogroups.com>, "Nigel Weeks"
> <nweeks@...> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > > You can put pretty much anything you like in a BLOB field, but
> the usual
> > > > method is to put a filename in a VARCHAR, and keep the file on your
> > > > filesystem, rather than slow down your DB pulling data from BLOB's.
> >
> > > That's a very broad statement to make and I disagree :-)
> >
> > I'd love to know why you disagree! I've probably been doing things
> wrongly
> > for the last 5 years...
> > I feel another learning curve coming on...:-)
> >
> > It's true I was assuming that only files were to be stored, and with
> PHP, it
> > takes two database operations to pull data from a blob(one to get blob
> > reference, the second to visit that reference and pull the data)
> > Sure, it's all done automatically with
> > `ibase_fetch_object($recordset,IBASE_FETCH_BLOBS)`, but behind the
> scenes,
> > there's still extra traffic.
> >
> > Keen to learn, so bring it on...
> >
> > Nige.
>
> I would agree with Martijn in the sense that it is a very broad
> statement, however in many cases it is true. Both methodologies have
> different advantages.
>
> Store inside database:
>
> Pros:
> Single file backup
> Can be sure the data exists
>
> Cons:
> Backups may become huge
> Access to BLOBs (possibly) slower than file system
> Storing backversions of blobs
> 2GB size limitation
> Need to agree on the format of the file stored (is it compressed?
> encrypted?)
> Second network round trip to retrieve BLOB data
> Must use database to search for files
>
> Outside the database:
>
> Pros:
> Database can be tiny, as it is only a file index
> Can use distributed storage (like Nigel does)
> Backups are a lot smaller, and traditional incremental and delta
> backups can work when files stored in file system.
> Files searchable and can be indexed using other tools at the same time.
>
> Cons:
> Need to deal with fact that someone may delete a file from disk but
> not tell your index.
> Need to deal with fact that someone may move all the files to a new
> folder and now you have to fix up your index.
> Need to remember to backup your data, gbak alone isn't enough.
>
> Of couse neither solution is optimal at any point in time. Nigel, you
> mentioned in a prior message a week or two back how you use an index
> database on a really old slow machine, and use distributed storage
> around the office computers to hold the actual files. That seems to be
> a sensible way of achieving your goal.
>
> Adam
>
>