--On Friday, April 13, 2001 09:25:22 -0400 ghaley@mail.venaca.com wrote:
hi,
thank you, phillippe, for your thoughtful comments.
the concern about the size of the data.fs is exactly why we have used an external db to store most of the content for our site. i have worried about the integrity of the binary data being moved in and out of a db, especially the larger data. things below a meg or so don't seem to be affected at all, but i've not done enough testing of the files that are split then retrieved and rejoined to be able to state with the same confidence that they are or are not getting corrupted.
Hi, The zope.org Data.fs recently cleared 2GB in size, with something on the order of 200,000 objects. We store a number of reasonably sized objects (1.5mb) in the ZODB, and while I am confident that the ZODB does not corrupt them, I do recommend using some proxy-cache technology as the ZODB is not optimized for the rapid delivery of large binary objects. The other issue is that Zope currently has a "hard" time out where if a request takes more than 30minutes to send, it will give up ... which is another reason for the proxy-cache technology. Until I see compelling evidence otherwise, my stance is that the ZODB is just as safe to store your data in as a relational database, and soon (with replicated storage and berkely storage) it will offer compelling scalability for read-predominant environments that I don't think any relational database can match for less than six figures. -- -mindlace- zopatista community liason