, 2010 2:24 PM
To: Gavin Towey; mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: RE: mySql versus Sql Server performance
Here's the innodb stuff - although the largest data set I've used in the stats
run is around 20MB, which doesn't seem like much to me.
'innodb_adaptive_hash_index
: [SPAM] RE: mySql versus Sql Server performance
Importance: Low
It's not much, but the dataset is definitely larger than your buffer pool. You
could try this query to show how much data+index is in innodb: SELECT
SUM(data_length+index_length) as data size FROM INFORMATION_SCHEMA.TABLES WHERE
I merely skimmed it, but your comment that you pay the query compilation
cost on every request suggests to me that you're not using prepared
statements. If you can, you should :-)
Also, MySQL *does* support SPs, from 5.0 onwards or something. You could
split into separate modules for pre- and
/ - everything you could possibly want (to buy)
From: vegiv...@gmail.com [mailto:vegiv...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Johan De
Meersman
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 9:55 AM
To: Patrick Thompson
Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: mySql versus Sql Server performance
I merely skimmed it, but your comment
MySQL and most other databases require adjustment of server settings, and
especially of table structures and indexes to achieve the best performance
possible.
If you haven't examined index usage for the queries you're running, or adjusted
server memory settings from defaults, then it's no
-
From: Gavin Towey [mailto:gto...@ffn.com]
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 2:00 PM
To: Patrick Thompson; mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: RE: mySql versus Sql Server performance
MySQL and most other databases require adjustment of server settings, and
especially of table structures and indexes
/ - everything you could possibly want (to buy)
From: Martin Gainty [mailto:mgai...@hotmail.com]
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 3:53 PM
To: Patrick Thompson; gto...@ffn.com; mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: [SPAM] RE: mySql versus Sql Server performance
Importance: Low
Patrick-
you'll want to determine
...@channelintelligence.com]
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 12:31 PM
To: Gavin Towey; mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: RE: mySql versus Sql Server performance
Query:
SELECT *
FROM Item
WHERE CollectionID = 'a0d3937b-f5a8-0640-dec8-bdd60f7f4775' AND
ExternalID = 'fred1'
Explain Extended
PM
To: Patrick Thompson; mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: [SPAM] RE: mySql versus Sql Server performance
Importance: Low
So it's a primary key lookup. That's a rather large primary key though, it's
going to bloat the table size since innodb in mysql uses clustered indexes.
So the explain plan
, October 25, 2010 4:50 PM
To: Patrick Thompson; mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: [SPAM] RE: mySql versus Sql Server performance
Importance: Low
So it's a primary key lookup. That's a rather large primary key though, it's
going to bloat the table size since innodb in mysql uses clustered indexes.
So
10 matches
Mail list logo
