InnoDB is _often_ faster than MyISAM. However, blind conversion has _some_ likelihood of causing _some_ queries to be slower. Here is my doc on all the issues (I could think about):
(Don't worry about being on the MariaDB site, it all applies to regular MySQL, with or without XtraDB.)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lorenzo Milesi [mailto:maxxer@stripped]
> Sent: Monday, November 05, 2012 2:20 PM
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: Change storage engine to InnoDB
> I've a (large?) FreeRadius database with MySQL 5.0.51.
> When the database was set up, MyISAM engine was used. Since now we're
> experiencing some performance problems, I was considering the migration to
> InnoDB, which I read should be faster.
> MySQL is a master/master replica setup. Since the ALTER TABLE will take
> some minutes (I did a test run on a separate db), and one of the two
> database while still active is not publicly accessible, I tought I could
> run the alter on the "offline" db first using the following:
> SET SQL_LOG_BIN=0;
> ALTER TABLE ... ENGINE=InnoDB;
> SET SQL_LOG_BIN=1;
> then switch the online db and run the same on the second node.
> From what I've read around, and basicly here , the main adivces are
> about disk storage, but not much more...
> My questions are:
> * will I really gain in performance by switching to Innodb?
> * is the above procedure a good schedule?
> * is there anything else I should care about, before starting?
>  http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/converting-tables-to-innodb.html
> Lorenzo Milesi - lorenzo.milesi@stripped
> GPG/PGP Key-Id: 0xE704E230 - http://keyserver.linux.it
> MySQL General Mailing List
> For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
> To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql