"Andrew Hill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Perhaps it would be better to insert the timestamp, rather than letting
> MySQL set it.
Sure. This gives consistency in your situation.
> Or, is there perhaps a way to let MySQL select which table
> to perform the insert into, based on the time?
No.
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Andrew Hill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
> Okay, cool. A couple of things:
> 1) We *think* that our bottleneck is RAM and the calculation of indexes
> when inserting into the table (about 500 million rows). There's
> certainly plenty of CPU and disk I/O left
> -Original Message-
> From: William H. Bowers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 22 July 2004 03:55
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: re: Splitting data across tables
> If indexing seems to be the cause of the slowdown, it may be
> faster to drop the indexes,
culty/bowers
-Original Message-
From: John McCaskey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 11:50
To: Andrew Hill; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Splitting data across tables
As far as I know there is no way to make mysql choose the table to
insert to dynamically. Howeve
PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 8:46 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Splitting data across tables
Hi,
Okay, cool. A couple of things:
1) We *think* that our bottleneck is RAM and the calculation of indexes
when inserting into the table (about 500 million rows). There's
cert
ipients is prohibited and may be unlawful.
--
> -Original Message-
> From: John McCaskey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 21 July 2004 16:24
> To: Andrew Hill; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Splitting data
I've had no problems partitioning data in this exact same manner.
However my timestamp column is always pre-computed in the application
code because it is neccesary to round it to the last 5 minute interval
so I would not encounter the issue you mention. I'd recommend simply
computing the timestam
