List:General Discussion« Previous MessageNext Message »
From:Alec.Cawley Date:March 14 2006 12:19pm
Subject:Re: Merge tables.
View as plain text  
"Paul Halliday" <paul.halliday@stripped> wrote on 14/03/2006 12:09:10:

> As an example:
> There was a table called event.
> This table is now broken up like this:
> event _<sensor>_<date>.
> So for every sensor, and every day, there is now a new table. So if I
> have 20 sensors, every day I will have 20 new tables.
> With this in mind, does this design make sense?
> how will this scale?
> Is there anything I can do through configuration (I doubt the
> developer will change the design) to speed things up? or a workaround
> that I could do on my end to compensate?

Could you explain how this is meant to improve scalability? Because to my 
mind it is probably the best way I can imagine to make the system 
unscaleable. To me, this design very much does *not* make sense.

You have bought, in MySQL, a highly tuned specialist engine for seqrching 
and sorting stuff in the most efficent manner. And then you have said that 
you will disable all its optimisation and force it into a linear search. 


Merge tables.Paul Halliday14 Mar
  • Re: Merge tables.Martijn Tonies14 Mar
  • Re: Merge tables.Prasanna Raj14 Mar
  • Re: Merge tables.Martijn Tonies14 Mar
    • Re: Merge tables.Alec.Cawley14 Mar
    • Re: Merge tables.Paul Halliday14 Mar
      • Re: Merge tables.Alec.Cawley14 Mar
        • Re: Merge tables.nigel wood14 Mar
          • Re: Merge tables.Alec.Cawley14 Mar
          • Permissions block database creationDoug Pinkerton14 Mar
            • RE: Permissions block database creationMarciano [Intercol]14 Mar
            • Re: Permissions block database creationКосов Евгений14 Mar
  • Re: Merge tables.Martijn Tonies14 Mar