>>>>>>@All,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>We are investigating whether it would be possible to return a file somewhere that the SQL server service has access to by calling a stored procedure.
>>>>>>We do not want to store the file itself in the database, but we want to return and store the through simple calls through ODBC.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Is there anything like that possible ? Wihtout using CLR ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Walter,
>>>>>
>>>>>If it is SQL server, then what is wrong with storing the files in the database (while physically they are separately on the disk)? You would then simply read/write them as a regular field. Check FILESTREAM attribute if file sizes are above 1 Mb.
>>>>
>>>>It bloats the database.
>>>
>>>Not FILESTREAM. Read the doc here for pros and cons : https://msdn.microsoft.com/library/hh461480
>>
>>I've been reading that... not sure whether that fits the bill. The datastore of the files need to be stored elsewhere (not on the expensive drives meant for SQL server) on a share. I'm not sure whether that is feasible. Any one knows ?
>
>Not my subject but I think the storage must be local. Why are drives on the SQL machine more expensive than other ?

On SQL clusters most often they use enterprise class high performance SSD solutions, while simple drive shares do not demand such storage.
Our database at university settings is ussually only of of a few dozen on the same SQL server instance.

Walter,