Re: Merge vs multiple innodb performance

2005-02-09 Thread SGreen
Marcin Lewandowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 02/08/2005 05:29:39 PM: > Chuck Herrick napisał(a): > > 200 - 400 tables is too many. > > Is it too many for merge, innodb or both? > > > Try having one CUSTOMERS table. You know who is logged in, so you can > > use that information in a WHERE clau

Re: Merge vs multiple innodb performance

2005-02-08 Thread Marcin Lewandowski
Chuck Herrick napisaÅ(a): 200 - 400 tables is too many. Is it too many for merge, innodb or both? Try having one CUSTOMERS table. You know who is logged in, so you can use that information in a WHERE clause. Yes, but If somebody would find a password (maybe using brute-force attack) to one account

Merge vs multiple innodb performance

2005-02-08 Thread Marcin Lewandowski
Hi, I'm writing an windows app, which would connect to mysql server and modify user's data. There would be a few hundred of users. Every of them should have access only to few tables. It's not a problem with mysql's authentication mechanism. Kind of compilation of the data from users' tables sh