Chris,
We run a large data warehouse with tables similar to yours. We basically gave up on
indexing and the overhead involved and just tablescan. The key is to partition the
data using a concept called Merge Tables. However, since we currently use Oracle,
eager to migrate to MySQL - I don't hav
Chris Fossenier writes:
... Query 1
> a1.phone_pander_flag <> 'Y'
> AND state.state = 'PA'
> AND ( h1.homeowner = 'Y'
> OR h2.probable_homeowner IN ('8','9')
> OR h2.homeowner_probability_model BETWEEN '080' AND '102' )
> AND ( p1c.exact_age BETWEEN '40' AND '60'
> OR estimated_age BETW
I saw the same that ms sql is faster but I think it's because of the ms
sql makes better use of index's
I had a table with almos 300mil records on ms sql query with index'es it
was no problem (in about 5 min I got the result) and with a much smaller
db on mysql (with 80 mil records it took almost
nt: Monday, February 23, 2004 11:42 AM
To: Chris Fossenier; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: MySQL versus MS SQL
Hi Chris,
Chris Fossenier wrote:
> This is a long post, my apologies.
Speaking for myself, I found the detail most helpful. Thanks!
See response at bottom.
...snip...
> QUER
Hi Chris,
Chris Fossenier wrote:
This is a long post, my apologies.
Speaking for myself, I found the detail most helpful. Thanks!
See response at bottom.
...snip...
QUERY1
~~~
Indexed Fields (link, phone_pander,state, exact_age, estimated_age, phone,
first, last, address)
MS SQL QUERY (
