Re: MyISAM vs InnoDB

[mos]

At 08:32 AM 11/2/2006, you wrote:

> > >>         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.
> > >
> > > Ok, so your solution is to use something else?
> >
> >       Well, this is a MySQL list… you can use MySQL with InnoDB, if you
>are
> > willing to either have a proprietary backup solution or to use a β
>backend.
> >
> >
> > > Is there a better open source database out there for that amount of
>data?
> >
> >      Several.  MySQL’s own MaxDB, PostgreSQL, Firebird if you are
> into
> > Borland stuff, Ingres if you need XA distributed transactions.
>
>Firebird isn't Borland :-)
>
> > I usually recommend PostgreSQL, or Ingres if two-phase commits are
> > needed.
>
>Firebird has two-phase commits.

Martijin,
         Can Firebird store 1TB in a single table? All of FB tables are 
stored in a single .GDB file, so is it possible to even split the table 
across several drives?

         There is also the Falcon table engine that is coming out for 
MySQL, but MySQL AB claims it is *not* a replacement for InnoDb. So why 
introduce it?

Mike