Sudhir N wrote:
> Hi Johan
>
> Thanks, This is really helpful response...
>
> As I said.. there would be more read operations and slow write
> operation.. I may use Application level caching of data to reduce
> select queries..
> I am totally against of using manual partitioning as it would create
> lots of problems like primary keys, joins, clusters and replication
> etc..
> it would be difficult to migrate to another DB or upgrade mysql in
> future.. In future if we plan to upgrade mysql or use oracle than we
> wont be able to use built in partitioning support without modifying the
> application code because application knows about and handles partitions
>
> However my biggest concern is, Will mysql 4.1 be able to handle such a big table?
> around 50M each year so threre can be 250M records after five years..
>
What forbids you to upgrade to a newer version right now? If there is a
cost for you to add another machine i think the amount of time you are
investing now in finding a solution other than upgrading (that you
mention you will do anyway in the future) just grows.
And if you cannot afford another mashine for some reason you could
always install multiple versions of MySQL on the same box and slowly
migrate existing data to the new version.
And if your DBA if the decider he clearly is not doing his job in
assisting you.
