在以前的一个项目中，我将图像存储在文件系统上，这在备份、复制和文件系统与数据库不同步方面造成了很多麻烦。

在我最新的项目中，我将图像存储在数据库中，并将它们缓存到文件系统中，它工作得非常好。到目前为止我还没有遇到任何问题。

您需要记住的一件事是数据集的大小。我相信Dillie-O是唯一一个稍微说到点子上的人。

如果你有一个小的，单用户的消费应用程序，那么我会说DB。我有一个DVD管理应用程序，使用文件系统(在程序文件中)，它是一个PIA备份。我希望他们每次都能把它们存储在数据库中，让我选择保存文件的位置。

对于一个更大的商业应用，我会开始改变我的想法。我曾经在一家开发县书记员信息管理应用程序的公司工作。我们将图像存储在磁盘上，以一种编码格式(以处理大量文件的FS问题)，基于县指定的仪器编号。这在另一个方面是有用的，因为图像可以在DB记录之前存在(由于他们的工作流程)。

和大多数事情一样:“这取决于你在做什么”

I'm not sure how much of a "real world" example this is, but I currently have an application out there that stores details for a trading card game, including the images for the cards. Granted the record count for the database is only 2851 records to date, but given the fact that certain cards have are released multiple times and have alternate artwork, it was actually more efficient sizewise to scan the "primary square" of the artwork and then dynamically generate the border and miscellaneous effects for the card when requested.

这个图像库的最初创建者创建了一个数据访问类，它根据请求呈现图像，并且对于查看和单独的卡片来说，它的速度非常快。

This also eases deployment/updates when new cards are released, instead of zipping up an entire folder of images and sending those down the pipe and ensuring the proper folder structure is created, I simply update the database and have the user download it again. This currently sizes up to 56MB, which isn't great, but I'm working on an incremental update feature for future releases. In addition, there is a "no images" version of the application that allows those over dial-up to get the application without the download delay.

到目前为止，这个解决方案工作得很好，因为应用程序本身被定位为桌面上的单个实例。有一个网站将所有这些数据存档，以供在线访问，但我绝不会使用相同的解决方案。我同意文件访问更可取，因为它可以更好地适应图像请求的频率和数量。

希望这不是太多的废话，但我看到了这个主题，并想从一个相对成功的中小型应用程序中提供一些我的见解。

我几乎从不把它们存储在数据库中。最好的方法通常是将映像存储在一个由中央配置变量控制的路径中，并根据DB表和主键(如果可能的话)命名映像。这给了你以下优势:

通过更新全局配置，将映像移动到另一个分区或服务器。 通过搜索图像的主键来查找与图像匹配的记录。 您的图像可以访问处理工具，如imagemagick。 在web应用程序中，您的图像可以由web服务器直接处理(节省处理)。 CMS工具和Coldfusion等网络语言可以处理本地上传。

I have worked with many digital storage systems and they all store digital objects on the file system. They tend to use a branch approach, so there will be an archive tree on the file system, often starting with year of entry e.g. 2009, subdirectory will be month e.g. 8 for August, next directory will be day e.g. 11 and sometimes they will use hour as well, the file will then be named with the records persistent ID. Using BLOBS has its advantages and I have heard of it being used often in the IT parts of the chemical industry for storing thousands or millions of photographs and diagrams. It can provide more granular security, a single method of backup, potentially better data integrity and improved inter media searching, Oracle has many features for this within the package they used to call Intermedia (I think it is called something else now). The file system can also have granular security provided through a system such as XACML or another XML type security object. See D Space of Fedora Object Store for examples.

我负责一些管理许多TB图像的应用程序。我们发现在数据库中存储文件路径是最好的。

这里有几个问题:

database storage is usually more expensive than file system storage you can super-accelerate file system access with standard off the shelf products for example, many web servers use the operating system's sendfile() system call to asynchronously send a file directly from the file system to the network interface. Images stored in a database don't benefit from this optimization. things like web servers, etc, need no special coding or processing to access images in the file system databases win out where transactional integrity between the image and metadata are important. it is more complex to manage integrity between db metadata and file system data it is difficult (within the context of a web application) to guarantee data has been flushed to disk on the filesystem