One of my DB's is fast approaching 200,000 records and many have larger. If you store the images "by reference" they will have minimal impact (no matter what their size) on your database file size as you'll be storing a file path to the image file instead of storing an actual copy of the image in a field in the database.
Images can be imported and stored in the database.
Images can be referenced and stored outside the database (but displayed in the database)
Referenced images are often recommended for speed considerations and database size.
This Google may help
I understand that images can be stored elsewhere, but what is Filemaker's capacity?
Bump. I have the same question. We've currently got 7,000+ records with associated pdfs and other files (stored in the database), and adding another ~3000+ per year at least. and i'm considering integrating information from excel sheets that we're currently using, adding maybe another... (*gulp*) 300,000 small records (with maybe 5 fields each) per year. is filemaker going to be able to handle something like that??? at what point should we start archiving? has anyone else tried to run on large numbers of records like this?
thanks, i'm hoping to get some insight as to whether this is feasible!
Can FileMaker "handle" it? Yes. Here are the technical specs:
Number of records per table: 64 quadrillion total records over life time of file.
Maximum record size: Limited by disk space or maximum file size.
Number of fields/columns per record: 256 million total fields over life time of file.
Number of relationships per file: Limited only by disk space or maximum file size.
But if you're storing thousands of documents, I recommend buying SuperContainer by 360Works. It's an excellent tool.