[AccessD] Should I use Attachments?

Hi Doug

You could store the attachments in a single table in a separate database with a unique key. Then you don't need to read from the attachments' table except when you need an attachment and this will be identified with its unique key. Possible bloating will be kept in that table too. 

Perfect if the boss won't allow discrete attachment files.

/gustav

>>> dhb at flsi.com 15-05-2011 23:56 >>>
Jim & Rocky,

What I like about the Attachment object is that: 
1. it handles multiple files;
2. the user only has to dbl-click, select a file, and open; 
3. since the images are stored in the DB it doesn't matter if the files are
moved, renamed, or deleted. 
Have you guys (or anybody else) developed a way to mimic that functionality
through links?

Re: Jim's point about the the image being retrieved as the user moves thru
the records...does ACE actually retrieve the image when the record becomes
current? It appears that only the file count is displayed and the image
isn't retrieved til the user dbl-clicks. Am I wrong?

-DB

-----Original Message-----
From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com 
[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Jim Lawrence
Sent: Sunday, May 15, 2011 12:30 PM
To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving'
Subject: Re: [AccessD] Should I use Attachments?

We went through this issue many times, from MS Access to Oracle and MS SQL
databases and keeping the images external is always faster. Sometimes we had
to store the images internal to the database but then, when working in
Oracle forms, a button had to be added to initiate the image loading...if
someone just flitted from record to record the impact of an image being
retrieved from the actual database was show stopper...and this would impact
every user on the system.

My vote is to store them external and enjoy the performance.

Jim



-----Original Message-----
From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com 
[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Rocky Smolin
Sent: Sunday, May 15, 2011 8:50 AM
To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving'
Subject: Re: [AccessD] Should I use Attachments?

Even inside the database don't you need some way to identify the picture - a
title or caption?  So renaming the jpgs is one way to do that and so the
combo box to select the picture has those descriptive file names.  Or in the
table where you store the path and file name of the picture you let the user
enter a short description which shows in the combo box.  Either way the
photos stay outside the db.  If you store them in the db, the photos will
still be stored outside the db somewhere.  If they exist in two places that
opens up possibilities of having the one set not be the same as the other
set.

Still voting for keeping them outside.

However, I am interested in whether or not a graphic file can now be stored
in a db without bloating it.  Please let us know what your experiments
reveal.

Rocky


-----Original Message-----
From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com 
[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Arthur Fuller
Sent: Sunday, May 15, 2011 8:16 AM
To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
Subject: Re: [AccessD] Should I use Attachments?

I've been toying with this new feature, which is basically a binary data
type which a built-in compressor/decompressor. A client and I are
experimenting with it, for one basic reason: a given record might have
associated with it anywhere from 2 to 60 photos. Having that many photos
living in some directory somewhere, especially given their arbitrary names,
can quickly become quite a hassle. On the other hand, simply specifying the
path to a given client's photos seems workable. So I don't yet know which
method we'll choose.

A.