Re: multilple mysql engines, one set of shared table spaces? (addendum)

On 5/14/2014 3:45 PM, shawn l.green wrote: Hello Bruce, On 5/14/2014 2:11 PM, Bruce Ferrell wrote: OK, put away the flamethrowers, I KNOW it's dumb. I've been asked for the upteenth time is this possible and if so under what conditions? So I pose the question to the community, is it? Under

Re: multilple mysql engines, one set of shared table spaces?

Hello Bruce, On 5/14/2014 2:11 PM, Bruce Ferrell wrote: OK, put away the flamethrowers, I KNOW it's dumb. I've been asked for the upteenth time is this possible and if so under what conditions? So I pose the question to the community, is it? Under what conditions? Is it reliable or not? Are t

Re: multilple mysql engines, one set of shared table spaces?

As far as I know, the only way this is possible is if your entire database is formatted as MyISAM. In that case, multiple MySQL processes, each started with external-locking enabled, may safely share a data folder. The contention will almost certainly kill you as far as performance goes.. and i

multilple mysql engines, one set of shared table spaces?

OK, put away the flamethrowers, I KNOW it's dumb. I've been asked for the upteenth time is this possible and if so under what conditions? So I pose the question to the community, is it? Under what conditions? Is it reliable or not? Are there authoritative references to support the answers?

Re: Performance boost by splitting up large table?

Hi Larry, On May 14, 2014, at 5:05 AM, Larry Martell wrote: > We have a table with 254 columns in it. 80% of the time, a very small > subset of these columns are queried. The other columns are rarely, if > ever, queried. (But they could be at any time, so we do need to > maintain them.). Would I

Re: Performance boost by splitting up large table?

Hi, You could split the table into two and can avoid code changes by creating a view which matches what code is looking for. I think loading few fields vs 254 into memory will make a difference but if your select statement only have specific fields you want and not the whole row (and also given t

Performance boost by splitting up large table?

We have a table with 254 columns in it. 80% of the time, a very small subset of these columns are queried. The other columns are rarely, if ever, queried. (But they could be at any time, so we do need to maintain them.). Would I expect to get a marked performance boost if I split my table up into 2