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

关于这个话题，这里有一份有趣的白皮书。

是否使用BLOB:数据库或文件系统中的大型对象存储

答案是“视情况而定。”当然，这取决于数据库服务器及其blob存储方法。它还取决于存储在blob中的数据类型，以及如何访问这些数据。

使用数据库作为存储机制，可以有效地存储和传递较小的文件。较大的文件可能最好使用文件系统存储，特别是如果它们将经常被修改/更新。(blob碎片在性能方面成为一个问题。)

Here's an additional point to keep in mind. One of the reasons supporting the use of a database to store the blobs is ACID compliance. However, the approach that the testers used in the white paper, (Bulk Logged option of SQL Server,) which doubled SQL Server throughput, effectively changed the 'D' in ACID to a 'd,' as the blob data was not logged with the initial writes for the transaction. Therefore, if full ACID compliance is an important requirement for your system, halve the SQL Server throughput figures for database writes when comparing file I/O to database blob I/O.

这里的诀窍是不要成为一个狂热分子。

这里需要注意的一点是，在专业文件系统阵营中没有人列出特定的文件系统。这是否意味着从FAT16到ZFS可以轻松击败所有数据库?

No.

事实上，许多数据库都胜过许多文件系统，即使我们只讨论原始速度。

正确的做法是为您的精确场景做出正确的决定，要做到这一点，您需要一些数字和一些用例估计。

不，因为页面分割。实际上，您定义的行可以是1KB - n MB，因此数据库的页面中会有大量空白，这对性能不利。

The word on the street is that unless you are a database vendor trying to prove that your database can do it (like, let's say Microsoft boasting about Terraserver storing a bajillion images in SQL Server) it's not a very good idea. When the alternative - storing images on file servers and paths in the database is so much easier, why bother? Blob fields are kind of like the off-road capabilities of SUVs - most people don't use them, those who do usually get in trouble, and then there are those who do, but only for the fun of it.

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。