> You know, this might sound strange, but does the performance drop off at > all if you lose the indices? A table scan of rows 8 bytes wide is going > to be pretty damn quick. Plus there's a lot less maintenance to do > without > indices and no risk of them getting corrupted.
A full table scan is never going to be faster than using indexes when you're running several hundred million rows. Does anyone else have any thoughts? Does anyone know the charge you take in having deleted rows? Or an unsorted index? Which is worse? Thanks Mark -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
