By doq on

Currently was thinking of making some kind of friendly URLs for files, e.g. system/files?file=drupal.txt to file/<node-id-or-node-short-user-friendly-title>/drupal.txt.

Q1: Is this might be more search friendly?
Q2: Is it performance matter to create new folder with files for each node?
Q3: If I will have 1000s of files (crucial for FAT32 at least) in one ¨files/¨ directory. Does Drupal optimizes such a thing, e.g. splits that directory to several?

[Heine: fixed tags]

⋅ Categories: Drupal 4.7.x

Comments

grcm’s picture

grcm commented

It would be more search-engine friendly to have long-names-of-files, but if you aren't finding the files through e.g. Google then there is little point. However, under 4.6, having a LOT of long-name-path-aliases can impact performance- watch your database indices carefully. PostgreSQL might be faster than MySQL if you're constantly adding/changing content.

Drupal won't split up files into different directories unless you tell it to; in most situations it isn't a problem. If Windows's FAT can't handle it, can you use Linux or NTFS?

Drupal performance shouldn't be a problem with a few thousand files- why not try it and see?

-- Version Control your Drupal web site with The File High Club's Free Trial!

James Andres’s picture

James Andres commented

I'm probably preeching to the choir .. but.

The FAT32 file system is very antiquated and not suited to running a webserver at all. Between issues of permisssions, security, data integrity, file size and number constraints, etc. you should be very careful here. Although I'm a bit biased I would suggest getting your system onto a Linux or Mac platform. If desperate you can always use Windows server with NTFS (I said i was biased didn't I ;-).

Of course if this is just a small personal site I wouldn't worry to much. These issues get more important as the number of visitors you get increases.

James

Lead Developer on Project Opus
www.projectopus.com