sql server misc: In article <1116339675.806304.75060@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
jsa1981@hotmail.com says...
[quoted text, click to view]

I've used those programs to compress GIS maps, and they work well, but
there is loss of quality. We've also used them in doing court document
scanning/reporting, and they uncompress quite well, but it's a control
that needs to be linked with the program.

When I want to resize partitions, I purchase a new drive (like a 200GB
IDE drive, setup GHOST with the SCSI drivers, then ghost the old drive
to the new IDE drive, replace the old drive(s) with the larger ones (not
the 200, it's a storage space), get the raid worked out, then use Ghost
to copy the image back to the new (larger) raid array. When you move
images like that it lets you resize the destination partition in the
process.

--
--
spam999free@rrohio.com

I have a database that stores images for my company. The database file
is becoming larger and larger. At the moment it is 17Gb.

I was wondering if there is a way I can split this database into two or
three files, and maybe put the files in different places. The server my
company is using is old, and only has one 25Gb harddrive I can put this
database onto.

What would be really useful is an online tutorial/article on this
subject.

Thanks in advance for any help.

Jagdip

That was my plan, but I am left with legacy software, and there are
more important things that I have to do.

I have found a nifty free program that will resize the images to a set
size, and it decreases the image's size by as much as 90% !!! I have
instructed any employees entering images to use this program.

Anyway, this is a litle impractical anyway, as we have about 18,000
images and it would take years to move them out of the database. There
is the added complication of rewriting our software to take account of
this. Again, I was thinking of creating a program that would do this,
but it is on the back of my list.

As you can see, I am a little stuck.

In article <1116335279.540017.263370@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
jsa1981@hotmail.com says...
[quoted text, click to view]

I've always found that storing images in a database was a problem and
limited the users growth/options. Can you store the image files in a
directory and use a pointer in the database to allow the application to
find the proper location/file name?

When we do packages that allow images to be saved, we store the images
in a folder on the drive and store a link/file name in the database -
keeps the DB small and allows for moving of the images to anywhere you
want at any time.


--
--
spam999free@rrohio.com

Thanks for the advice. I'll get round to upgrading asap. Hopefully I
still have a few months beofre that though.
I'll probably just replace the whole service with a rack system.

Thanks for the advice. I'll get round to upgrading asap. Hopefully I
still have a few months beofre that though.
I'll probably just replace the whole system with a rack system.

[quoted text, click to view]

Look up FILEGROUPS and the like. They're in the Books Online that come with
SQL server.

But honestly, your "best" short term answer may be "buy a new HD" and copy
stuff over.


[quoted text, click to view]

While you're waiting for the vendors to install the rack, check out Books
Online, specifically the section on Files and Filegroups. It'll save you
some grief a year or so later when your files grow beyond the size you've
got in your shiny new rack system.


joe.

[quoted text, click to view]