> Hi all,
>
> Are there any reasons why one would NOT use separate ibd files for each
> table
Fragmentation for one.
A single file can re-use empty space from deleted rows for any added
rows. A single file can only re-use space from that one file.
Therefore the sum table size will be larger with many files. Depending
on how much data you regularly delete.
(Fragmentation also occurs when row sizes are increased.)
The file system is also an issue. Lots of files require a good file
system, like Reiserfs, and not FAT32. A single file is just as
efficient with any file system.
But I don't believe there are any IO difference. The same number of
file handles are used, whether they all access one file or 1000 files.
Personally I like a single file, it's easier to administer and HotBackup
works.
But, if any IonnDB developers read this mailing list, we really need to
be able to break this file using defined table space, as with Oracle.
Then have as many/few files as we like....
Ben
Olaf Stein wrote:
Hi all,
Are there any reasons why one would NOT use separate ibd files for each
table (--innodb_file_per_table). It seems logical to me to separate what
does not belong together logically (different databases), but I as the
shared tablespace is the default I wonder if it has nay advantages I am not
aware of
Thanks
Olaf
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
