Scalable Image Storage

前端 未结 11 511
半阙折子戏
半阙折子戏 2020-12-12 09:42

I\'m currently designing an architecture for a web-based application that should also provide some kind of image storage. Users will be able to upload photos as one of the k

相关标签:
11条回答
  • 2020-12-12 10:17

    Maybe have a look at the description of Facebook hayStack

    Needle in a haystack: efficient storage of billions of photos

    0 讨论(0)
  • 2020-12-12 10:17

    I've written image store on top of cassandra . We have a lot and writes and random reads read/write is low. For high read/write ratio I suggest You mongodb (GridFs).

    0 讨论(0)
  • 2020-12-12 10:24

    We use MogileFS. We're small scale users with less than 8TB and some 50 million files. We switched from storing in Amazon S3 some years ago to get better control of file names and performance.

    It's not the prettiest software, but it's very "field tested" and basically all users are using it the same way you will be.

    0 讨论(0)
  • 2020-12-12 10:25

    As part of Cloudant, I don't want to push product.... but BigCouch solves this problem in my science application stack (physics -- nothing to do with Cloudant, and certainly nothing to do with profit!). It marries the simplicity of the CocuhDB design with the auto-sharding and scalability that is missing in single-server CouchDB. I generally use it to store a smaller number of big file (multi-GB) and a large number of small file (100MB or less). I was using S3 but the get costs actually start to add up for small files that are repeatedly accessed.

    0 讨论(0)
  • 2020-12-12 10:31

    Have you considered Amazon Web Services? S3 is web-based file storage, and SimpleDB is a key->attribute store. Both are performant and highly scalable. It's more expensive than maintaining your own servers and setups (assuming you are going to do it yourself and not hire people), but you get up and running much more quickly.

    Edit: I take that back - its more expensive in the long run at high volumes, but for low volume it beats the initial cost of buying hardware.

    S3: http://aws.amazon.com/s3/ (you could store your image files here, and for performance maybe have an image cache on your server, or maybe not)

    SimpleDB: http://aws.amazon.com/simpledb/ (metadata could go here: image id mapping to whatever data you want to store)

    Edit 2: I didn't even know about this, but there is a new web service called Amazon CloudFront (http://aws.amazon.com/cloudfront/). It is for fast web content delivery, and it integrates well with S3. Kind of like Akamai for your images. You could use this instead of the image cache.

    0 讨论(0)
提交回复
热议问题