Do you need foreign keys? Then the switch to InnoDB may be worthwhile.
That's part of the reason I switched. I also had occasional table corruption
with my myISAM tables; this also went away when I switched to InnoDB.
Joshua Thomas
Network Operations Engineer
PowerOne Media, Inc.
tel: 518-687-6143
jthomas@stripped
---
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice
there is.
- Yogi Berra
---
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Travis Reeder [mailto:travis@stripped]
> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2004 3:02 AM
> To: MySQL List
> Subject: Deciding whether to convert to InnoDB
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm sure this has been asked before, but I cannot find solid
> evidence as
> to whether switching would provide us with any benefits.
>
> We currently run MyIsam tables on 4.1.x and we are continuously
> processing 24 hours/day and using about 20 tables heavily.
> The process
> is generally doing Updates or Inserts depending on whether the row is
> available for updates, otherwise new rose is inserted and
> then updates
> until the next time bucket. It's always a different time
> bucket though,
> not always the same row being used. We found that running 3
> processing
> threads seems to be around optimal (10 was too many, 1 was
> too little)
> for being able to process the maximum amount. Mysql runs at
> 100% pretty
> much constantly.
>
> Now would InnoDB help in this situation? Would it allow us
> to increase
> the thread count to push more through in a shorter amount of time
> (because the tables wouldn't be locking)?
>
> And if so, would it be enough to justify the extra space required for
> innodb?
>
> Regards,
>
> Travis
>
>
>
>
> --
> MySQL General Mailing List
> For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
> To unsubscribe:
http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=1
