[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Does this sound about right? Anybody see any road hazards? If not, and > this line of thinking is reasonable, should the DB with the older records > also be replicated so that when a new old records table needs to be > created, I don't have to repeat everything on the slave? >
Most of the problems documented here <http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/merge-table-problems.html> and some of it here <http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/merge-storage-engine.html> The problems that stand out - A MERGE table cannot maintain uniqueness constraints over the entire table. - Key reads are slower. When you read a key, the MERGE storage engine needs to issue a read on all underlying tables to check which one most closely matches the given key. To read the next key, the MERGE storage engine needs to search the read buffers to find the next key. -- raj shekhar facts: http://rajshekhar.net | opinions: http://rajshekhar.net/blog Yoda of Borg are we: Futile is resistance. Assimilate you, we will 'Borg? Sounds Swedish.' - Lily, Star Trek First Contact -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
