PHWinfo - Afficher un message

31/03/2008, 18h08

You would have to backup the Tifs either way if you use SQL2005. Having them
in the db is easier to manage from a backup standpoint since it is all in
the db. If you store them out of the db you have to backup the files as a
separate operation and you have to worry about integrity if the backups are
not synced. In 2008 even though the files are on the file system with
Filestream datatype you will still get an integrated backup directly thru
SQL Server.

--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
Solid Quality Mentors

"Arne Garvander" <ArneGarvander@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:73BA04A4-67B1-48C9-A271-8A57B7CCAD5C@microsoft.com...
> Each file would be 20-40 K. They will not change once created. I wonder
> how
> the design would impact backups.
>
> --
> Arne Garvander
> Certified Geek
> Professional Data Dude
>
>
> "RubÃ©n GarrigÃ³s" wrote:
>
>> You have to think not only in storing the files inside or outside SQL
>> Server.Maybe the most important thing is what are you going to do with
>> the
>> files when they are stored. This is the MOST important thing. You have to
>> know your data and its use.
>>
>> SQL Server is very good searching for data and resolving queries

If
>> you
>> are going to work a lot with metadata of the images (date, exposure,
>> size,
>> and so on) it will worth to have these in the database. You have to think
>> about the retention period of the data or if you will use more frequently
>> some images or not. The performance for streaming files from SQL Server
>> is
>> not as good as NTFS (this is one reason why we have the new FileStream
>> datatype in SQL Server 2008

)
>>
>> It is a big and difficult decision. In our experience SQL Server (prior
>> 2008) is better for small files (<1MB) or for files that have metadata to
>> query (great performance vs NTFS).
>>
>> --
>> RubÃ©n GarrigÃ³s
>> Solid Quality Mentors
>>
>> "Arne Garvander" <ArneGarvander@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
>> message
>> news:9B426916-74F0-49D2-A4C5-25651C892ED7@microsoft.com...
>> >I am using SQL Server 2005.
>> > I have the option to store a Tiff image inside SQL Server or In the
>> > file
>> > system.
>> > I have 15,000 images per day. I have the option of storing them in PCL
>> > format orTIff format.
>> > One of our concerns is convenience of retrieving the file and backing
>> > up
>> > the
>> > file.
>> >
>> > --
>> > Arne Garvander
>> > Certified Geek
>> > Professional Data Dude
>>
>>
>>

31/03/2008, 18h08	#6
Andrew J. Kelly Messages: n/a Hébergeur:	Re: Storing Tiff image in SQL Server. You would have to backup the Tifs either way if you use SQL2005. Having them in the db is easier to manage from a backup standpoint since it is all in the db. If you store them out of the db you have to backup the files as a separate operation and you have to worry about integrity if the backups are not synced. In 2008 even though the files are on the file system with Filestream datatype you will still get an integrated backup directly thru SQL Server. -- Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP Solid Quality Mentors "Arne Garvander" <ArneGarvander@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:73BA04A4-67B1-48C9-A271-8A57B7CCAD5C@microsoft.com... > Each file would be 20-40 K. They will not change once created. I wonder > how > the design would impact backups. > > -- > Arne Garvander > Certified Geek > Professional Data Dude > > > "RubÃ©n GarrigÃ³s" wrote: > >> You have to think not only in storing the files inside or outside SQL >> Server.Maybe the most important thing is what are you going to do with >> the >> files when they are stored. This is the MOST important thing. You have to >> know your data and its use. >> >> SQL Server is very good searching for data and resolving queries If >> you >> are going to work a lot with metadata of the images (date, exposure, >> size, >> and so on) it will worth to have these in the database. You have to think >> about the retention period of the data or if you will use more frequently >> some images or not. The performance for streaming files from SQL Server >> is >> not as good as NTFS (this is one reason why we have the new FileStream >> datatype in SQL Server 2008 ) >> >> It is a big and difficult decision. In our experience SQL Server (prior >> 2008) is better for small files (<1MB) or for files that have metadata to >> query (great performance vs NTFS). >> >> -- >> RubÃ©n GarrigÃ³s >> Solid Quality Mentors >> >> "Arne Garvander" <ArneGarvander@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in >> message >> news:9B426916-74F0-49D2-A4C5-25651C892ED7@microsoft.com... >> >I am using SQL Server 2005. >> > I have the option to store a Tiff image inside SQL Server or In the >> > file >> > system. >> > I have 15,000 images per day. I have the option of storing them in PCL >> > format orTIff format. >> > One of our concerns is convenience of retrieving the file and backing >> > up >> > the >> > file. >> > >> > -- >> > Arne Garvander >> > Certified Geek >> > Professional Data Dude >> >> >>