At 09:35 AM 11/1/2006, Martijn Tonies wrote:
> >> > MyISAM vs InnoDB ? What is the best to use
> >>
> >> Always use a DBMS, and MySQL is no (proper) DBMS without a
> >> transactional
> >>backend. There are InnoDB, which is not completely free (needs a
>proprietary
> >>backup tool); BDB, which is deprecated until further notices; and SolidDB,
> >>which
> >>is still β.
> >>
> >> Choose your evil.
> >
> >Ok, so your solution is to use something else? Is there a better open
> >source database out there for that amount of data?
>
>Firebird? PostgreSQL?
>
>Both are open source and ALWAYS free for whatever usuage, no dual
>licensing whatsoever.
Martijn,
Sure, I've thought of those too. But has anyone gotten Firebird to
store 700-800gb tables? Can you split Firebird's .gdb file across drives?
The main problem with tables of that size is maintaining the index. My
upper limit for MySQL is 100 million rows. After that any new rows that are
added will take much longer to add because the index tree has to be
maintained. I definitely recommend cramming as much memory in the box as
humanly possible because indexes of that size will need it. Probably the
simplist solution for MySQL is to use Merge tables. I know some people
with MySQL, Oracle and MS SQL have terabyte tables, but I haven't heard of
other databases storing tables that large. So if you or anyone else has
used FireBird or PostgreSQL to store terabyte tables, I'd certainly would
be interested in hearing about it. :)
Mike
>Martijn Tonies
>Database Workbench - tool for InterBase, Firebird, MySQL, NexusDB, Oracle &
>MS SQL Server
>Upscene Productions
>http://www.upscene.com
>My thoughts:
>http://blog.upscene.com/martijn/
>Database development questions? Check the forum!
>http://www.databasedevelopmentforum.com
