Re: Storing many big files in database- should I do it?
John R Pierce <pierce@hogranch.com>
From: John R Pierce <pierce@hogranch.com>
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Date: 2010-04-27T08:54:15Z
Lists: pgsql-general
Rod wrote: > Hello, > > I have a web application where users upload/share files. > After file is uploaded it is copied to S3 and all subsequent downloads > are done from there. > So in a file's lifetime it's accessed only twice- when created and > when copied to S3. > > Files are documents, of different size from few kilobytes to 200 > Megabytes. Number of files: thousands to hundreds of thousands. > > My dilemma is - Should I store files in PGSQL database or store in > filesystem and keep only metadata in database? > > I see the possible cons of using PGSQL as storage: > - more network bandwidth required comparing to access NFS-mounted filesystem ? > - if database becomes corrupt you can't recover individual files > - you can't backup live database unless you install complicated > replication add-ons > - more CPU required to store/retrieve files (comparing to filesystem access) > - size overhead, e.g. storing 1000 bytes will take 1000 bytes in > database + 100 bytes for db metadata, index, etc. with lot of files > this will be a lot of overhead. > > Are these concerns valid? > Anyone had this kind of design problem and how did you solve it? > S3 storage is not suitable for running a RDBMS. An RDBMS wants fast low latency storage using 8k block random reads and writes. S3 is high latency and oriented towards streaming