On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 01:42:23AM -0600, Mark Lubratt wrote:
> I'm considering using the raw tablespace from InnoDB for a project I'm
> working on. I noticed a couple of years ago that there were reports of
> tablespace corruption on Linux and these raw tablespaces. Have these
> problems been fixed? I'm considering running it on a hardware RAID
> (stripes of mirrors, I forget if that's RAID 10, or RAID 01). Should I
> use FreeBSD instead of Linux?
> I'm considering this option to keep database maintenance to a minimum
> (running out of tablespace issues). That way, InnoDB already owns all
> the disk space and I don't have to continually be adding tablespace
> Any thoughts?
I usually tell people to think twice about using raw disks for two
1. Performance. I've not seen anybody report a significant
performance boost doing this.
2. Transparency. It's nice to be able to use a wider variety of
tools to examine, copy, back up, and otherwise tinker with data.
By using a raw disk, you lose most of this.
However, if the performance gain is really there, maybe it's more
important than #2.
Jeremy D. Zawodny | Perl, Web, MySQL, Linux Magazine, Yahoo!
<Jeremy@stripped> | http://jeremy.zawodny.com/
MySQL 4.0.15-Yahoo-SMP: up 51 days, processed 1,925,631,314 queries (428/sec. avg)