From: Dan Nelson
Date: April 2 2010 9:18pm
Subject: Re: MyISAM better than innodb for large files?
List-Archive: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql/221130
Message-Id: <20100402211810.GA76941@dan.emsphone.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

In the last episode (Apr 02), Gavin Towey said:
> I disagree.  There's nothing about his requirements that sounds like
> MyIsam is a better solution.  InnoDB should be your default for all
> tables, unless you have specific requirements that need myisam.  One
> specific example of an appropriate task for myisam is where you need very
> high insert throughput, and you're not doing any updates/deletes
> concurrently.
> 
> You want the crash safety and data integrity that comes with InnoDB.  Even
> more so as your dataset grows.  It's performance is far better than myisam
> tables for most OLTP users, and as your number of concurrent readers and
> writers grows, the improvement in performance from using innodb over
> myisam becomes more pronounced.

His scenario is "perhaps updated once a year", though, so crash recovery and
multiple writer performance is not important.

-- 
	Dan Nelson
	dnelson@stripped