Re: drawbacks of Saving documents to Sql server

1. I have done this before with various sized Word docs. The performance penalty was not noticeable.
2. Retrieving the files from the file system is always faster but not necessarily better. Flat-file databases are faster than relational databases but the features of the relational database outweigh the performance hit.
3. The biggest problem with the files will be transport between the web server and the web client. I broke the files into 64K chunks and up/downloaded them via a web service. In the database I used a table to store a "header" record with one row per file containing the filename, filesize, number of 64K chunks, etc... Another child table was the "detail" table with one row per file chunk. An image column was used to store the actual chunk of binary data.
4. SQL Server 2005 performs better than SQL Server 2000 hands down.

Bryan Phillips
MCSD, MCDBA, MCSE
Blog: http://bphillips76.spaces.live.com




"sameer" <sameer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:EC07B737-4741-4D74-B581-14FE6C758471@xxxxxxxxxxxxx:

Hi all,

.Net 1.1
Sql server 2000

i am working on a document managment module of my application, all i want to
do here is save the documents uplaoded by the user from my winforms over
webservices application\ webforms applicatoin to sql server 2000. I have been
told saving it on the webserver's file system might be a better way but seems
that microsft is gong more towars saving everthing in sql server. So my
question to the gurus out there is

1. does any one really have any hands on experience saving documents to sql
server 2000 and if so please tell me if u have any kind of performance issues
with this.

2. i was told that sql server is kind of a little slow in streaming out the
documents from the database, expecially bigger ones when compared to the
retriving it from the web server's file system, is this true ?

3. please tell me any other problesm that u might have faced when saving\
retriving files from the database.

4. is sql server 2005 any better in saving and retriving documents from the
database.

thanks

sameer

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: drawbacks of Saving documents to Sql server
    ... Bryan, thanks for yor reply and got some more questions for you. ... document to the user when it is stored in the database. ... SQL Server 2005 performs better than SQL Server 2000 hands down. ... that microsft is gong more towars saving everthing in sql server. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework)
  • Re: MS Access DAO -> ADO.NET Migration
    ... William Vaughn ... Microsoft MVP ... Hitchhiker's Guide to Visual Studio and SQL Server ... My migration app works building a SSCE database file with imported data ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet)
  • Re: Cluster will not fail over.
    ... > As far as the TCP/IP issue goes, you had to rebuild the cluster and were ... > able to restore the master database. ... > a cluster installation you'll have to revisit. ... >> This worked bringing up the sql server in minimal mode. ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering)
  • Re: MS Access DAO -> ADO.NET Migration
    ... full SQL Server and I see the logic you explained in a multi user ... allow two users to access the same database file Read/Write at any given ... The book was a pleasure to read after the gibberish that Microsoft 'puts ... Hitchhiker's Guide to Visual Studio and SQL Server ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet)
  • Re: MS Access DAO -> ADO.NET Migration
    ... For that it is much harder to handle the incremental identifier, ... database but although they have the data, they are not connected at the same ... The book was a pleasure to read after the gibberish that Microsoft 'puts ... SQL Server Management Studio is nowhere to be found on my ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet)