Best Practice For Temporarily Storing Images Until Their Database Entity Is Created?
Mar 21, 2011
I'm working in ASP.NET 4.0, and I've got a large web form which represents a single business entity. A user can upload multiple images associated with the entity. The entity is created and assigned a GUID upon submitting the form. The files will be stored to a file system.
The problem is that we have to name the files after the GUID that is assigned to the entity after it is inserted to the database. So before the submit button is clicked, we will have several image files floating around in limbo.
There are obvious answers to this question -- you save the images to the file system and then when the business entity is created, you rename those files. However, I believe that there must be very strong patterns and several key details that would make for a very robust system. What's best practice for this scenario?
I am sorry to ask this general question. But I could not find any comments sharing about real world experience when it comes to uploading photos. I knows a little bit about uploading photos to SQL database. One is uploading the photos insidea folder and the link to the photos will be stored inside the imagemap (not sure about this datatype??) column and perhaps the other way is to store the photos inside the database itself. Which one is the common and best practice?Any links that I can refer to?
i am a beginer and i want to know how to store images in the database tables like pictures of the pizzas and when the user selects one of the pizza from the dropdownlist he sees the image of the selected pizza.
I suppose this question has been asked to death all over the web, but I can seem to find a clear cut answer. What I am trying to achieve is as follows: I have a web application that lists various products, their descriptions, names etc and also an image of that specific product. The user will type in a product code or name of the product and a page will pop up with al the previous mentioned info and image or images of that specific product. The problem I am having is: I read somewhere that storing images in a database is 'bad idea' since it effects performance, then I read somewhere else to keep it in the images / or app_data folder. But what would be the best approach and how would I call it from the database (if that's the best way)? And if App_Data / images are the way to go how many images can I put in there (??) already the product catalog has several hundred images of various products. So how would one go about sorting everthing in those folders without having a few hundred images rolling down in my solutions explorer.
i m developing website using asp.net with microsoft access 2003 i have product details along with the images now i want to add this images into database but how i add this pictures what code is use if there are 100 products with 100 images i want to show 10 records per page i need also code of that
i m developing website using asp.net with microsoft access 2003 i have product details along with the images now i want to add this images into database but how i add this pictures what code is use if there are 100 products with 100 images i want to show 10 records per page i need also code of that
Friends have quick question for you.i want to know storing videos and images into database(binary data) or local hard drive is efficent. What way general websites stores them in their websites.
I'm working on a project which is using EntityFramework 4 and I am using the entity objects as my business objects. I ran into an issue recently where I had a context declared in a using statement in a user control. The method the statement was in returned an entity object which got used in another control. So I had to detach the entity then attach it to the new context in the other control. I would like to avoid this if possible. What I'm thinking is I would like to declare a context in the master page and then pass that to any page/usercontrol that needs it so they are all using the same context and I don't have to write all these using statements.
My questions are these:
1) is it a bad practice to declare a context on Pre_Init/Page_Load and then dispose of it on Page_Unload?
2) if it is what is the best practice for handling them?
3) if I do go the route of declaring the context in the master page what is the best way to pass that to the pages/usercontrols?
SQL Server Express 2005 MS Visual Studio 2005 Using ASP.NET with VB code behind. Requirements: Click a button on an ASPX page to disconnect temporarily all DB connections when not in use to allow a script to backup/copy the database to a safe backup location. When a user access the db afterwords, the DB connections will be re-established.
If this is imposible, recommend an alternative. Note: I am working with what I have been given and authorized to use.
let us assume that I have a reusable business layer that further makes use of a data access layer that was implemented using Entity Framework 4.0. The entities returned/consumed by the business layer are self-tracking, allowing us all the goodies that come with those type of entities. I would like to be able to store the entities I work with across post backs (on order to avoid re-querying every time). Basically let us assume I have a paged GridView with 10 items in it, and something like a DetailsView to edit those items. Every time you select a new row on the grid, the details view updates with the information of the selected row. My preference would be to only query for the entities on the initial request of the page and store it in session. Then subsequently I have a list of entities that I can work with and eventually modify and send back to the business layer with all of the changes.
I really want to use session instead of view state to reduce the page payload (self tracking entities are heavy) however I really like view state for this because of the fact that when the user navigates away from the page there is no residual effect. Some of the things that worry me are: When a user navigates away from the page to another page, the entities from the previous page are still in session. I could always do something on load of a page to do housekeeping type of work. Not sure if that's good practice. I am worried about people opening browser tabs and having two views into the same page, it seems like that might pose a problem. Is this even a good approach? Seems like I am trying to have the best of all worlds, it would definitely be much easier to simply re-query on every post back for the entities and pay the 50-100ms hit of the database trip.
i want to store images of my employees with thier profiles in sql server database.i have following reservations.whether i should compress images or not if yes please provide me sample code or article how should i retrieve images efficiently, i an afraid of asp.net application performance issue. i think with ten thousand employee records it will halt or slow down
I am designing an prototyping an app the needs to store images, similar to facebook. This will be a public facing site and I am not sure how many users I will end up with but what I am looking for is a way to efficiently retrieve them.
So far I am thinking of storing them in SQL Server varbinary columns. I have the upload code and the storage code for that. My concern is retrieving them. I can retireve and build the image tag on the fly but I am worried about having to hit the database for each one.
I have been thinking about getting all images for a user and caching them in the asp.net cache for 10 to 30 seconds. I have never had to do something like this so I would be interested in hearing a few different approaches. Obviously the images can vary in size and I was thinking about defining a size limit, but I haven't gotten that far yet.
I'm working on an application which will store around 50.000 images within it's first year and another 75.000 in it's second. Images can come from Galleries, news images, article images and profile images. So I want to give each image a GUID and store the GUID in the database.As for the directory structure i was thinking of something like this:
So I'm using the first 4 characters of the GUID as my directory structure to spread images a bit more evenly between directories. Now I have some questions about this approach:Is it considered good practice to store all different kinds of images together rather then use ~/Images/Upload/Profiles, ~/Images/Upload/Articles etc.I'm also storing thumbnails and they have a different GUID obviously so the thumbs will not be in the same folder as the original and somehow that doesnt give me a good feeling but I guess it should not matter but.Same goes for Galleries, I'm used to store galleries in folders like ~/Images/Upload/Galleries/12 , and now all the images from a gallery will be scattered around in different subfolders, is this a big performance hit?Do you guys have any other ideas for directory structures?
As you can probably see I'm a bit afraid to use this approach but since there will be lots of images maybe even more then the numbers i gave i have to let the control go I think :)
I'm building a Web application that will eventually contain a lot of images. These images will need to be displayed in different formats across the site. What would be the pros/cons of the two solutions:
Storing various versions of the picture when they are uploaded (e.g. thumb, small, medium, large, verylarge) Resizing the image through the URL - e.g. /Content/Image/1?height=300
Edit:I had a really hard time accepting one answer over the other, so for anyone reading this q/a, take your time to read both answers because the accepted answer was selected by the flip of a coin :) They're both equally good.
I am trying to build a small e-commerce website that will allow user to upload and store the image of their product in the database and also the user could upload the image of the product and compare it with all the similar product images that are already stored in the database. I am using MS ASP.Net using VB.Net as the front end.
if MS SQL server is the best option to carry out such task or should I consider some other database to do this in terms of complexity involved as well as the integration with MS .Net framework.
I am building an application using Asp.Net 4.0 and Entity framework 4.
I have already created the model class (edmx) file using the Database-First method of the Entity framework.
Now I am almost nearning the end of the application. I have realised I need to add one more table to my database.
How do I add the newly created table to the model class (edmx) file.
If I again regenerate the model class, similar to what I did the first time i.e using the Database-First approach, will my current application be affected.
Will the already in use data like tables, relationships and views be affected in anyway.
Do I have to follow this approach everytime I need to add a new table to the entity model class.
Adding data into kartlar table (RehberID,KampanyaID,BrimID) is ok. But which Kart'ID created? I need to learn which Id created after adding data (RehberID,KampanyaID,BrimID) into Kartlar?
[code]...
How can I do that? I want to get data from Kartlar which data I added?
I am an experienced developer but I am new to web application development. Now I am in charge of developing a new web application and I could really use some input from experienced web developers out there.
I'd like to understand exactly what experienced web developers do in the code-behind pages. At first I thought it was best to have a rule that all the database access and business logic should be performed in classes external to the code-behind pages. My thought was that only logic necessary for the web form would be performed in the code-behind. I still think that all the business logic should be performed in other classes but I'm beginning to think it would be alright if the code-behind had access to the database to query it directly rather than having to call other classes to receive a dataset or collection back.
I have a requirement to allow users in a content management system to create their own image maps through a gui interface, which I have accomplished. But instead of saving the image map to the page code, I want to save the image map code to a database (sql), which I've also accomplished. When I started down this road in my head I was thinking the whole time that I'd just add the "usemap" attribute at runtime shown below where promo1.ImageMap holds the entire map code:
I guess I didn't think it though well enough, because it seems that "usemap" only expects the name of the existing map to use from the page code, and not the map code as a string.
how to apply the map from the database to the image at run time?
Have a question about the best approach for file storage in a SQL database. I have a table called Widgets, and each row in the Widgets table can have multiple files. I also have another table called Extensions, and again each record in this table can have many files.
Here is what I am considering:
Approach #1:
[Code]....
That approach is very simple and easy to use, but I feel that I could merge the two file tables into one, then use lookup tables:
Approach #2:
[Code]....
The thing is, there are no duplicate or shared files between the two types of objects. So even though I feel better about approach #2, I am concerned that I may be adding additional complexity (and using more server resources to perform the joins), than needed.
