List:General Discussion« Previous MessageNext Message »
From:James Eaton Date:October 9 2006 9:42pm
Subject:Re: InnoDB, 1 file per table or 1 BIG table?
View as plain text  
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bruce Dembecki" <bruce@stripped>
To: <mysql@stripped>
Cc: "Ow Mun Heng" <Ow.Mun.Heng@stripped>
Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 3:13 PM
Subject: Re: InnoDB, 1 file per table or 1 BIG table?



> There are some minor performance benefits here when run against 
> benchmarks... but tiny. It is generally true that for tiny tiny
> We really really like innodb_file_per_table - but mostly because it 
> makes our lives easier in many ways, not so much for performance 
> reasons.

Interesting stuff.  Is the directory/file organization then similar to 
that used by MyISAM tables when this option is enabled?  That is, along 
the lines of innodb_data_root/database/table?

How do you go about converting InnoDB databases from the single tablespace 
to those using the table-per-file file organization? 

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