sheeri kritzer schrieb:
Why are you using a heap table?
We started out with a myisam-table years ago when the table was much
smaller und less frequently updated. We tried innodb about 2 or 3 years
ago and couldn't get a satisfying result. We then changed it to HEAP and
everything was fine.
Now we are getting locking-Problems as the number of updates and selects
constantly increases and need to upgrade our server-hardware anyway. I
like the scalability of clusters for load-balancing and HA and we have
had problems with our mysql-replications on the heavy load servers
(total > 2000 updates/Sec average) every 2-3 months that we couldn't
reproduce. Other replications with less throughput run stable for years
(same kernel, same mysqld). I'd get rid of all my replication problems
when I put the most frequently updatet tables into a cluster...
My company has tables with much more information than that, that get
updated much more frequently. We use InnoDB tables, with very large
buffer sizes and have tweaked which queries use the cache and which
don't, on a system with lots of RAM (10Gb). Basically we've set it up
so everything is in memory anyway.
Perhaps a similar setup would help for you?
that sounds interesting since we couldn't get good performance using
innodb in our case - but thats a few years ago. things may have changed?
I'll definitely give it a try next week, too.
Could you give me more information on your system? hardware, size of the
table, average number of updates/sec?
thanks for your suggestions
Jan
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
