• Welcome to the Chevereto user community!

    Here users from all over the world gather around to learn the latest about Chevereto and contribute with ideas to improve the software.

    Please keep in mind:

    • 😌 This community is user driven. Be polite with other users.
    • 👉 Is required to purchase a Chevereto license to participate in this community (doesn't apply to Pre-sales).
    • 💸 Purchase a Pro Subscription to get access to active software support and faster ticket response times.

S3 - Meta Data - Wordpress

D

davidk

Chevereto Noob
1. What is the nature of the S3 support. Are images stored in S3 bucket exclusively (not as copies). Looking for application that does NOT store images as blobs within the database. Can the folder structure in the bucket be mimiced in the organization chevereto (albums/sub-albums)

2. Is it two way. Can I upload images to bucket directly and have them recognized by the chevereto.

3. Can any information added to a photo (e.g. caption, tags, etc) be stored in the photo's metadata. If so is it two way. Can cheverto read/write that meta data manually/automatically.

4. Is there a wordpress plugin to allow easy insertion/maintenence of images into wordpress content.
 
1. System works with no local/database copies when using external storage.
2. No, it doesn't read the bucket.
3. No, because that means that the image must be altered and that causes more hits on the hard disk.
4. No.
 
Last edited:
3. That seems an odd reason. All kinds of photo editors support editing the various meta data including GIMP. Regardless, bottom line is cheverto no? That's a deal breaker for me. Gotta have a solution that if a photo is moved outside the database the essential data such as title, caption, description, and tags go with the photo.
 
You can't compare a local image editor with a server side editing library (GD). If we start to edit the images (like when you do a watermark) the thing is that the server side editing library is not that powerful either to make a loss less editing or to do it without burning the machine. In this case, metadata is not that expensive as watermarks but still means a hit on the disk.

If for every title, description, tags or whatever edition you want to trigger that, you are adding a load to the server in the form that the file must be re-edited so you will start a potential ddos bottleneck. You will be hitting the disk countless times for each editing, just to have that data in the image itself? That is something that not even Flickr does.

Bottom line, one of the points of having a database is to have an abstraction between files and data. Not to replicate data between files.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top