Mixing
Database structure of product images
At the moment I have 3 table: products, images, products_images.
So, basically I store product's images in "products_images" table.
When a product is updated, I remove all rows from "products_images" table related to that product, and add new one.
Also, I need to save the order, now the order is how they are stored in database.
Is this correct approach? Or maybe there are a better database structure to store product's images?
postgresql
asked Jan 2 at 8:17
jahozajahoza
144
add a comment |
At the moment I have 3 table: products, images, products_images.
So, basically I store product's images in "products_images" table.
When a product is updated, I remove all rows from "products_images" table related to that product, and add new one.
Also, I need to save the order, now the order is how they are stored in database.
Is this correct approach? Or maybe there are a better database structure to store product's images?
postgresql
asked Jan 2 at 8:17
jahozajahoza
144
You can have one column in product_images table isDeleted once you add or remove anything check in the table if the link between product and image already exist then update the bit to 0 or 1 as needed. And for new records add a row with default bit isDeleted 0.
– devedv
Jan 2 at 8:19
Read the answer here by GBN.
– Tim Biegeleisen
Jan 2 at 8:22
add a comment |
At the moment I have 3 table: products, images, products_images.
So, basically I store product's images in "products_images" table.
When a product is updated, I remove all rows from "products_images" table related to that product, and add new one.
Also, I need to save the order, now the order is how they are stored in database.
Is this correct approach? Or maybe there are a better database structure to store product's images?
postgresql
asked Jan 2 at 8:17
jahozajahoza
144
At the moment I have 3 table: products, images, products_images.
So, basically I store product's images in "products_images" table.
When a product is updated, I remove all rows from "products_images" table related to that product, and add new one.
Also, I need to save the order, now the order is how they are stored in database.
Is this correct approach? Or maybe there are a better database structure to store product's images?
postgresql
postgresql
asked Jan 2 at 8:17
jahozajahoza
144
asked Jan 2 at 8:17
jahozajahoza
144
edited Jan 2 at 8:52
jahoza
asked Jan 2 at 8:17
jahozajahoza
144
asked Jan 2 at 8:17
jahozajahoza
144
asked Jan 2 at 8:17
jahozajahoza
144
144
You can have one column in product_images table isDeleted once you add or remove anything check in the table if the link between product and image already exist then update the bit to 0 or 1 as needed. And for new records add a row with default bit isDeleted 0.
– devedv
Jan 2 at 8:19
Read the answer here by GBN.
– Tim Biegeleisen
Jan 2 at 8:22
add a comment |
You can have one column in product_images table isDeleted once you add or remove anything check in the table if the link between product and image already exist then update the bit to 0 or 1 as needed. And for new records add a row with default bit isDeleted 0.
– devedv
Jan 2 at 8:19
Read the answer here by GBN.
– Tim Biegeleisen
Jan 2 at 8:22
You can have one column in product_images table isDeleted once you add or remove anything check in the table if the link between product and image already exist then update the bit to 0 or 1 as needed. And for new records add a row with default bit isDeleted 0.
– devedv
Jan 2 at 8:19
You can have one column in product_images table isDeleted once you add or remove anything check in the table if the link between product and image already exist then update the bit to 0 or 1 as needed. And for new records add a row with default bit isDeleted 0.
– devedv
Jan 2 at 8:19
Read the answer here by GBN.
– Tim Biegeleisen
Jan 2 at 8:22
Read the answer here by GBN.
– Tim Biegeleisen
Jan 2 at 8:22
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
Entity relationship consideratoin
If you don't share images between products (never use one image for more than 1 product) then your relationship is really One-To-Many and there is no need for products_images junction table. This would simplify your model to:
- Products (id_product, ...)
- Images (id_image, ..., id_product)
And id_product in Images table would have a Foreign Key pointing at Products(id_product). That way, when you want to detach all images from a product you would simply run an update statement:
UPDATE images SET id_product = NULL WHERE id_product = ?
Sorting consideration
Since you need to save the order in which images are stored in the database, depending on what columns you have in Images table you could use for example id_image if it was declared as SERIAL (auto-incremented integer value). As a rule of thumb in PostgreSQL (where there are no clustered indexes) remember that if you need the output sorted, you need to do that yourself (example: add an ORDER BY id_image) at the end.
answered Jan 2 at 9:10
Kamil GosciminskiKamil Gosciminski
11.8k32649
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f54003174%2fdatabase-structure-of-product-images%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Entity relationship consideratoin
If you don't share images between products (never use one image for more than 1 product) then your relationship is really One-To-Many and there is no need for products_images junction table. This would simplify your model to:
- Products (id_product, ...)
- Images (id_image, ..., id_product)
And id_product in Images table would have a Foreign Key pointing at Products(id_product). That way, when you want to detach all images from a product you would simply run an update statement:
UPDATE images SET id_product = NULL WHERE id_product = ?
Sorting consideration
Since you need to save the order in which images are stored in the database, depending on what columns you have in Images table you could use for example id_image if it was declared as SERIAL (auto-incremented integer value). As a rule of thumb in PostgreSQL (where there are no clustered indexes) remember that if you need the output sorted, you need to do that yourself (example: add an ORDER BY id_image) at the end.
answered Jan 2 at 9:10
Kamil GosciminskiKamil Gosciminski
11.8k32649
add a comment |
Entity relationship consideratoin
If you don't share images between products (never use one image for more than 1 product) then your relationship is really One-To-Many and there is no need for products_images junction table. This would simplify your model to:
- Products (id_product, ...)
- Images (id_image, ..., id_product)
And id_product in Images table would have a Foreign Key pointing at Products(id_product). That way, when you want to detach all images from a product you would simply run an update statement:
UPDATE images SET id_product = NULL WHERE id_product = ?
Sorting consideration
Since you need to save the order in which images are stored in the database, depending on what columns you have in Images table you could use for example id_image if it was declared as SERIAL (auto-incremented integer value). As a rule of thumb in PostgreSQL (where there are no clustered indexes) remember that if you need the output sorted, you need to do that yourself (example: add an ORDER BY id_image) at the end.
answered Jan 2 at 9:10
Kamil GosciminskiKamil Gosciminski
11.8k32649
add a comment |
Entity relationship consideratoin
If you don't share images between products (never use one image for more than 1 product) then your relationship is really One-To-Many and there is no need for products_images junction table. This would simplify your model to:
- Products (id_product, ...)
- Images (id_image, ..., id_product)
And id_product in Images table would have a Foreign Key pointing at Products(id_product). That way, when you want to detach all images from a product you would simply run an update statement:
UPDATE images SET id_product = NULL WHERE id_product = ?
Sorting consideration
Since you need to save the order in which images are stored in the database, depending on what columns you have in Images table you could use for example id_image if it was declared as SERIAL (auto-incremented integer value). As a rule of thumb in PostgreSQL (where there are no clustered indexes) remember that if you need the output sorted, you need to do that yourself (example: add an ORDER BY id_image) at the end.
answered Jan 2 at 9:10
Kamil GosciminskiKamil Gosciminski
11.8k32649
Entity relationship consideratoin
If you don't share images between products (never use one image for more than 1 product) then your relationship is really One-To-Many and there is no need for products_images junction table. This would simplify your model to:
- Products (id_product, ...)
- Images (id_image, ..., id_product)
And id_product in Images table would have a Foreign Key pointing at Products(id_product). That way, when you want to detach all images from a product you would simply run an update statement:
UPDATE images SET id_product = NULL WHERE id_product = ?
Sorting consideration
Since you need to save the order in which images are stored in the database, depending on what columns you have in Images table you could use for example id_image if it was declared as SERIAL (auto-incremented integer value). As a rule of thumb in PostgreSQL (where there are no clustered indexes) remember that if you need the output sorted, you need to do that yourself (example: add an ORDER BY id_image) at the end.
answered Jan 2 at 9:10
Kamil GosciminskiKamil Gosciminski
11.8k32649
answered Jan 2 at 9:10
Kamil GosciminskiKamil Gosciminski
11.8k32649
answered Jan 2 at 9:10
Kamil GosciminskiKamil Gosciminski
11.8k32649
answered Jan 2 at 9:10
Kamil GosciminskiKamil Gosciminski
11.8k32649
11.8k32649
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f54003174%2fdatabase-structure-of-product-images%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
You can have one column in product_images table isDeleted once you add or remove anything check in the table if the link between product and image already exist then update the bit to 0 or 1 as needed. And for new records add a row with default bit isDeleted 0.
– devedv
Jan 2 at 8:19
Read the answer here by GBN.
– Tim Biegeleisen
Jan 2 at 8:22