Tom Cunningham writes:
>(a) The docs say that spreading the underlying tables across different
>disks can make queries faster. I don't quite understand how this will
>work in a normal query: if I do a SUM(amount) over the entire table,
>will it be quicker if the table is spread across different disks? I
>don't see how mysql can avoid doing this sequentially.
Tom,
Multiple disks definitely helps, since in my case it allows me
to have N times the available read speed and N times the available
number iops (IOs/sec). In my case I have a 61GB merge table that
is based upon 180 separate myisam tables. This table contains 487M
records. The kinds of queries I'm doing, I would not be able to
handle cleanly without merge tables on 4.1.15.
Since trying to back this up would be a nightmare, I rely upon
a standby master, and 3 query slaves for this data. This way things
work reasonably, and I have some hope of surviving some kind of
hardware failure. This is just one small portion of the substantial
data set I'm responsible for over at Technorati.
Brad Eacker ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
