Yep;
I would suggest evaluating why you want to store them in a db in the first place - there can be valid reasons for doing it, though I believe the best one is reducing complexity. However this comes at some expense, though it might be worth if for you.
The major advantages to doing this are;
- your files will be copied to each of your replicas
- your files will be backed up with your db
- they're easy to associate with other data and add meta data to
- you don't have to replicate / manage where files are (if you have them stored statically and have multiple web servers, you would)
The major disadvantages are;
- replica resync will take longer as it has +10G to sync
- backups, unless you exclude this will take longer as they have +10G more data
- wasted storage / ram on stuff which doesn't change
- it's much slower than serving the content from apache (etc) directly as static content
Unless you're really trying to keep complexity down or have some other special use case, I would normally suggest storing files like this on Amazon S3 or equiv.
HTH
Russ
Rainforest |
+1-650-919-3216 |
rainforestqa.com