<appologies fo rlack of threading .. poxy postfix has overwriten my
sendmail install grrr .. qmail here i come .. >
On Thursday 01 January 1970 00:59, wrote:
> I just thought I would wade in with yet another piece of anti MySQL
> propaganda at this point :)
>
> We have a 30Gb database of historical Radius log stuff at work and at
> the time the machine was built a 32Gb SCSI disk was about the only
> thing available. People keep complaining to me about the disk being at
> 97% and so we piddle around carving a few meg off here and there but of
> course the database just keeps growing. Now you all and I know thay
> with any half way decent database one would simple stick a new disk
> into the machine and allocate new storage for the database on that
> disk, but of course this is MySQL and all of the *files* that represent
> tables have got to be in the same directory. Yes you say, but you
> *could* add the new disk and then create symlinks to the tables from
> wherever they get moved to the original directory. Sure. The old files
> are going to have to be moved 30Gb oooh several hours.
uhh .. so you wanted to run a 30gb database that could reasonably have
been expected to expand .. and you decided to implement it on a (
presumably ) IDE 30gb disc .. if you wanted extensibility a RAID array
might have been a plan .. and a nice Mylex RAID controller .. but that
would have been expensive .. RAID solutions have been available for
longer than 30gb diisks so it looks like you chose a budget option and
are now paying the price.
Or you could ahve gone down the Oracle route .. [ cost = processor speed
in mhz * annual profits + national debt of brazil ]
.. which free databse does implement the 'add another disk somewhere'
topology ? .. seriously .. I;d be keen to hear what other free db is out
there that will handle a 30gb db with the speed and reliablity of MySQL
.. postgres I suppsoe .. what else?
its horses for courses and it looks like you chose the wrong nag for that
application ... jsut the saem way as suggesting Oracle for someones toy
website would be a bad plan too. for quick access with 99% of it being
reads and the occasional write ( typicalweb usage ) I still think MySQL
is hard to beat .. postgres is good too and as soon as it gets a
auto_increment non standard SQL addition I'll even use it ;))
