3 ms·
I think the point the parent is trying to make is that no one would do that anyway, and mentioning it in the article as something that makes your application sl
by asadjb 10y ago
I think the point the parent is trying to make is that no one would do that anyway, and mentioning it in the article as something that makes your application slow is pointless.
- gedrap 10y agoExactly. Somewhat dramatic, but equivalent of saying 'decided to use postgresql instead of flat files, therefore scalable'. That's why I was really wondering if there are people who find strong reasons to do that.
- jjnoakes 10y agoBut the article mentions he used Google's cloud, and the OP asked "Why would anyone reimplement AWS?" It sure seemed like the OP skimmed the article, found something out of context, and refuted it here.
- gedrap 10y agoNope, I read it. Maybe just didn't explain my point clearly enough. He mentioned that he is using Google Cloud instead of storing images in MongoDB and my question was what's the big deal about it? It doesn't seem like something you'd do to make it more scalable, it's something you'd do anyway.
- jjnoakes 10y agoI've seen plenty of people suggest or question which is better, storing files in a database or outside of a database. Like just about everything, each has trade-offs. I don't find it immediately obvious that a database would never be used for such a thing, or that reaching for a third party file storage service is the only solution to consider.
- wuliwong 10y agoOP is just saying that in general even a pretty novice programmer who also strongly believed in the MVP mindset still wouldn't store images directly in the database. I think he was just using S3 as an example since it is the most popular solution for web developers right now.