I faced with the question how to add attachments with a size from 100 MB to 200 MB to an item of type "Defect".
I thinking of 2 ways to do this:
What is the better way to save space in our repository (DB backend)? ...or doesn't it matter in the DB backend?
We have the same struggle. Attachments are stored in the DB as blobs. This is definitely not good for the performance of the DB. We were told that the current 4MB limit is actually pretty high already.
Unfortunately, we don't have a good alternative.
I believe you need an interface to a document mgmt system where large files can be managed under version control. I am not sure, but maybe a combo of Integrity 11 + Thingworx + Windchill, could do the trick... if you have it.
why use a suggested combo? we got a configuration management system with ILMxxx and so we could use this, can't we?
I have no experience with Source Integrity. So I can't say. If that allows you to manage files, it should work, yes.
I know that Windchill stores the metadata in a DB and the actual files on a server. I also know that Integrity for requirements mgmt and test mgmt stores everything in a DB, including attachments. I know that as of Integrity/Windchill 11 the integration between the two should run smoother through Thingworx. But I have no experience with that either.
So we have the same struggle and no proper solution. All I can say is that it does matter for your DB. So your option 1 is not a good idea. And maybe you have an option 3.
Source Integrity we have also configured to store files in the DB repository and I'm in doubt of DB performance.
That's why I'm asking here for best practices.
Option 3 has to be created. Any hints or suggestions?
 Best practice to have a direct assignment between all parts of a development / process environment without a further tool interface.
I am currently involved in a large Integrity LM installation where we have analysed different options to shrink the multi TB database, to bring it back into a manageable state.
One of the concepts that we have discussed is FileVaulting.
FileVaulting is available for Windchill since years. For Integrity, back in 2009, we had the same (external stored files), but then we turned everything into the DB. It is really time to think about a better way to manage large content. To my knowledge, DB space costs still ax. 5 times as much as file storage. (primarily influenced by internal IT management costs).
If I would have to start with a new PTC Integrity project tomorrow, I would from the beginning on use File Vaulting. I would train the customer how to handle DB and the external storage correctly, from backup point of view, and then I would just switch it on. Managing a multi TB database is really not much fun.
What if we could create a stage or training environment as a PROD copy in less than 1h, wouldn't this be great?
I know that there are regulations that some data has to stay in the database. But obviously our Windchill customers have not such concerns. I encourage you all to try FileVaulting out!
Now, back to the initial question:
a) Attachments in W&D or
b) Files in ConfigMgmt (Source) or
c) External storage system with a (versioned) link to Integrity (CMS system)
I would offer all 3 options. I would define with the IT department an "object storage plan" to cover which type of object shall be stored where, and how to link. It's a company decision, perhaps driven by internal and external regulations.
Putting a 200MB+ file into Source is an option, as long as you need all the features from Integrity. If you don't, put it into a CMS and link it back.
Hope this helps, your questions are welcome
FYI, it looks like this product idea was posted, so you may want to cast your votes on it, and add your use-cases, so that product management can see them.