Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

The issue I've run into re: storing files as BLOBs in a database has been the "impedance mismatch" coming from others wanting to use tools that act on filesystem objects against the files stored in the database.

That aside I've had good experiences for some applications. It's certainly a lot easier than keeping a filesystem hierarchy in sync w/ the database, particularly if you're trying to replicate the database's native access control semantics to the filesystem. (So many applications get this wrong and leave their entire BLOB store, sitting out on a filesystem, completely exposed to filesystem-level actors with excessive permission.)

Microsoft has an interesting feature in SQL Server to expose BLOBs in a FUSE-like manner: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/sql/relational-databases/b...

I see postgresqlfs[0] on Github, but it's unclear exactly what it does and it looks like it has been idle for at least 6 years.

[0] https://github.com/petere/postgresqlfs




Minio is easy enough to spin up, S3-compatible. That seems like my default path to persistence going forward. More and more deployments options seem like they'll benefit from not using the disk directly but instead using the dedicated storage service path, so might as well use a tool designed for that.

S3 can be a bit of a mismatch for people who want to work with FS objects as well, but there are a couple options that are a lot easier than dealing with blob files in PGsql. S3cmd, S3fs; perhaps SSHfs to the backing directory of Minio or direct access on the host (direct routes untested, unsure if it maps 1:1).




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: