SQLite small blob storage: 35% Faster Than the Filesystem

I must point out Jim Gray's paper To Blob or Not To Blob[0]. His team considered NTFS vs. SQL Server, but most rationale applies to any filesystem vs. database decision. The summary was "The study indicates that if objects are larger than one megabyte on average, NTFS has a clear advantage over SQL Server. If the objects are under 256 kilobytes, the database has a clear advantage. Inside this range, it depends on how write intensive the workload is," but…

No file system attributes or metadata on records which also means no (xattrs/fattrs) being written or updated, no checks to see if it's a physical file or a pipe/symlink, no permission checks, no block size alignment mismatches, single open command. Makes sense when you consider you're throwing out functionality and disregarding general purpose design. If you use a fuse mapping to SQLite, mount that directory and access it, you'd probably be very similar performance (perhaps even slower) and storage use…

For small- to mid-sized projects, I’ve always realized huge gains in simplicity by haves “Files” tables to store various assets. It means instances in a web-farm can pull the files down when they initialize easily, it means files are automatically versioned, it provides an obvious place to put the files when they are being uploaded on the Admin panel. It means all the files are getting backed up as part of the database snapshots automatically. Things I’ve used this for…

This gets posted a lot here and I really wonder if anyone's bothered to try and replicate these results or test them with different sizes of data on different filesystems - You can see that the greatest disparity is with NTFS/windows while linux is pretty close in performance, but they don't bother to mention if they've got ubuntu formatted for ext4 or whatever. I can't really seem to find anything looking around, and this article is like 5 years old…