Do you need foreign keys? Then the switch to InnoDB may be worthwhile. That's part of the reason I switched. I also had occasional table corruption with my myISAM tables; this also went away when I switched to InnoDB.
Joshua Thomas Network Operations Engineer PowerOne Media, Inc. tel: 518-687-6143 [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. - Yogi Berra --- > -----Original Message----- > From: Travis Reeder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2004 3:02 AM > To: MySQL List > Subject: Deciding whether to convert to InnoDB > > > Hi, > > I'm sure this has been asked before, but I cannot find solid > evidence as > to whether switching would provide us with any benefits. > > We currently run MyIsam tables on 4.1.x and we are continuously > processing 24 hours/day and using about 20 tables heavily. > The process > is generally doing Updates or Inserts depending on whether the row is > available for updates, otherwise new rose is inserted and > then updates > until the next time bucket. It's always a different time > bucket though, > not always the same row being used. We found that running 3 > processing > threads seems to be around optimal (10 was too many, 1 was > too little) > for being able to process the maximum amount. Mysql runs at > 100% pretty > much constantly. > > Now would InnoDB help in this situation? Would it allow us > to increase > the thread count to push more through in a shorter amount of time > (because the tables wouldn't be locking)? > > And if so, would it be enough to justify the extra space required for > innodb? > > Regards, > > Travis > > > > > -- > MySQL General Mailing List > For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql > To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
