So, most of the “I want images in MySQL” conversations are terminated with “Don’t.” Some articles say “MySQL’s overhead isn’t worth it” and others that say “If you put the images in MySQL you don’t have to deal with the filesystem overhead.”
My company’s site has over 2 million images to store/retrieve, and our current setup is at its limit and does not scale well — 2 NFS servers. We’d rather avoid adding another NFS server, because it involves changing where images are located whenever we scale. The problem is that with so many images, there are so many inodes that the filesystem cannot keep up. As well, if a server is rebooted or offline for more than an hour (ie, during maintenance) it is extremely slow until the cache catches up (about half an hour).
We believe the best retrieval method is to use MySQL. We will be doing our own speed testing, so I’m not relying on what folks say here. But I’m curious — what do other folks think? Flickr uses MySQL for image storage…..