Re: Recommendations? Need image-capable DBMS for Sun

From: Eric W Burger <eburger_at_osf1.gmu.edu>
Date: 6 Jan 1995 14:46:05 GMT
Message-ID: <3ejl3d$5nv_at_portal.gmu.edu>


> > eedrjb_at_teamos.ericsson.se (Russell Bride) writes:
> > All the major DBMSes support images. But none seem to do a particularly
> > good job right now. Of the major DBMSes, Sybase's image support is
> > perhaps the creakiest (at least if you want to _update_ your images :-).
 Dana 'FelineGrace' Bourgeois (fg_at_jobe.shell.portal.com) wrote:
> I am interested in documents rather than images, actually. I would like
> to put one document per record rather than have to code methods to break
> documents into multiple records and reassemble them again later.

You might ask yourself if you *really* want to store the documents in the data base.

Pro: Unqualified consistency

Con: Lousy performance, poor resource utilization

We found *NO* database that supported images to our requirements. [Yes, we are a happy Sybase shop, but Sybase doesn't come close.  Prior to Sybase, we "used" Interbase and evaluated Informix.] We ended up coding our own access outside the data base for BLOBs.

--
--  Eric William Burger       --  +1 301/417-0700(v) 0707(f) --
--  George Mason University   --  SITE PhD Program           --
--  The Telephone Connection  --  Director of Engineering    --
The views expressed above do not necessarily reflect the views
of George Mason University or The Telephone Connection.
Received on Fri Jan 06 1995 - 15:46:05 CET

Original text of this message