List:General Discussion« Previous MessageNext Message »
From:Dan Nelson Date:October 9 2006 3:12pm
Subject:Re: InnoDB, 1 file per table or 1 BIG table?
View as plain text  
In the last episode (Oct 09), Ow Mun Heng said:
> Just wanted to know if it would be faster/better to implement this
> option into my.cnf
> 
> innodb_file_per_table = 1 
> 
> which would essentially make each table a file on it's own rather
> than have it all in 1 file. My belief is that it would be slightly
> more advantageous compared to 1 BIG file.
> 
> eg: 1 10GB file would perform poorer than 10 1GB files. 
> 
> Is this statement true and how far is is true?

I don't think that the number of files has any impact on query speed.
The advantage file-per-table gives you is the ability to recover unused
space easily by running OPTIMIZE TABLE.  With a single tablespace, the
only way to recover space is to dump all the tables, delete all the
tablespace files, and reload.

-- 
	Dan Nelson
	dnelson@stripped
Thread
InnoDB, 1 file per table or 1 BIG table?Ow Mun Heng9 Oct
  • Re: InnoDB, 1 file per table or 1 BIG table?Dan Nelson9 Oct
  • Re: InnoDB, 1 file per table or 1 BIG table?James Eaton9 Oct
    • Re: InnoDB, 1 file per table or 1 BIG table?Dan Nelson9 Oct
  • Re: InnoDB, 1 file per table or 1 BIG table?Bruce Dembecki9 Oct
    • Re: InnoDB, 1 file per table or 1 BIG table?Ow Mun Heng10 Oct
  • Re: InnoDB, 1 file per table or 1 BIG table?James Eaton9 Oct
    • Re: InnoDB, 1 file per table or 1 BIG table?Ow Mun Heng10 Oct