List:General Discussion« Previous MessageNext Message »
From:Baron Schwartz Date:May 27 2009 4:05pm
Subject:Re: innodb_file_per_table cost
View as plain text  
Hi Sebastian,

It depends.  In general, no.  In some filesystems and operating
systems, it actually helps.  I think you can base your decision on
whether it makes server administration easier for you.

Regards
Baron

On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 2:45 AM, Sebastien MORETTI
<sebastien.moretti@stripped> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Does the use of "innodb_file_per_table" option imply a performance cost ?
> Compared to default: all InnoDB indexes are in ibdataX file(s).
>
> Thanks
>
> --
> Sébastien Moretti

-- 
Baron Schwartz, Director of Consulting, Percona Inc.
Our Blog: http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/
Our Services: http://www.percona.com/services.html
Thread
innodb_file_per_table costSebastien MORETTI27 May
  • Re: innodb_file_per_table costBaron Schwartz27 May
    • Re: innodb_file_per_table costSebastien Moretti28 May
      • RE: innodb_file_per_table costJerry Schwartz28 May
        • Re: innodb_file_per_table costBaron Schwartz28 May
      • RE: innodb_file_per_table costRolando Edwards28 May