Hi! On Feb 16, Dan Nelson wrote: > In the last episode (Feb 16), Michael T. Babcock said: > > > At 06:27 PM 2/16/2003 -0500, Peter Grigor wrote: > > > > Well, MySql stores all its index information in one index file, > > > > so when you add another index it has to rebuild the WHOLE file. > > > > :) > > > > Anyone on the MySQL team feel like explaining that design decision, > > besides historical reasons? I doubt its any more efficient except in > > file descriptor usage (although I've expressed the same doubts about > > InnoDB's avoidance of the filesystem too). > > Which decision, putting all the indexes in one file, or rebuilding all > indexes whenever you ALTER TABLE or add an index? If the latter, I > agree with you. Modifying unrelated indexes or columns should not > force a rebuild of every index.
Of course not. And it won't eventually - it's in the todo. Regards, Sergei -- MySQL Development Team __ ___ ___ ____ __ / |/ /_ __/ __/ __ \/ / Sergei Golubchik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> / /|_/ / // /\ \/ /_/ / /__ MySQL AB, http://www.mysql.com/ /_/ /_/\_, /___/\___\_\___/ Osnabrueck, Germany <___/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
