You may try "fuse" (http://fuse.sourceforge.net/), implement a tiny file
system easily which uses mysql as data source and acts as a real file
system.

On 5/31/2011 5:42 PM, csg wrote:
> Igor Sysoev Wrote:
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
>> I can not say anuthing about subject, I'm just
>> interesting are any
>> advanatges to store images in MySQL instead of
>> file system ?
> First of all quite a lot of backend processes and application code
> relies on it. Those interfaces cannot be changed easily. But on the
> other hand for the ease of handling the data. For redundancy it is much
> easier and more performant to do MySQL replication instead of file
> system based approaches. With millions of files even when using deep
> hashed subdirectory trees a full rsync(1) run would take several hours
> up to half a day to perform a sync. Even when using tools utilizing the
> inotify(7) framework like lsyncd(1) [1] you have to run a full rsync(1)
> run from time (e.g., reboots due to kernel updates, inotify event
> overflow, etc.). With data backup you would face the same issues, too.
> As company policies discourage the use of AGPL-licenses software,
> MongoDB/gridfs is also not an option. Our current solution is Apache 2.2
> MPM worker/Perl-based but on the long term this does not scale too well
> anymore, that's why we are looking for alternatives.
>
> [1] http://code.google.com/p/lsyncd/
>
> Posted at Nginx Forum: http://forum.nginx.org/read.php?2,202577,202648#msg-202648
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nginx mailing list
> nginx@nginx.org
> http://nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx
>


_______________________________________________
nginx mailing list
nginx@nginx.org
http://nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx