From: Rick James
Date: September 19 2012 8:44pm
Subject: RE: InnoDB vs. other storage engines
List-Archive: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql/228201
Message-Id: <2E7DD7ADE53B044C8C8BCD9C5829E1EB148BB5E03D@SP2-EX07VS01.ds.corp.yahoo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

No flames from me; I stay out of that religious war.  However, the general =
consensus is to move to InnoDB.  So, here are the gotchas.  Most are non-is=
sues; a few might bite you, but can probably be dealt with:

http://mysql.rjweb.org/doc.php/myisam2innodb



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Manuel Arostegui [mailto:manuel@stripped]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 12:51 PM
> To: Mark Haney
> Cc: mysql mailing list
> Subject: Re: InnoDB vs. other storage engines
>=20
> 2012/9/19 Mark Haney <markh@stripped>
>=20
> > I hope this doesn't end in some kind of flame war.  I'm looking to
> > optimize my tables (and performance in general) of the DB my web app
> > is using.  I'm tweaking things a little at a time, but I'm curious as
> > to what the rest of the MySQL list thinks about changing my storage
> > engine from InnoDB to something else so I can optimize the tables on
> a regular basis.
> >
> > Is it worth the effort?  Any caveats?
>=20
>=20
> Hi Mark,
>=20
> I would depend on what your workload would be. Mostly writes, mostly
> reads, how many writes/reads do you expect etc.
> The best approach, from my point of view, would be, firstly, tune your
> MySQL server (if you've not done it yet) before getting into
> engine/tables optimizations which can be more complicated.
>=20
>  Manuel.