On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> [...]
> Which is likely to be slower.
Wow!
> [...] Just give it lots of Ram so that it can cache its indexes in
> mamory, and it will perform very well.
Thanks for taking time to answer this.
Cheers,
Gerald
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list
> Imagine I had a table with 50,000,000 rows, would it improve search
speeds
> if I split it up into smaller tables of 10,000,000 rows each? This means
> if I had to search for a record, I'd have to query the 5 tables one after
> the other.
Which is likely to be slower. If you have good indexes
Hi,
Imagine I had a table with 50,000,000 rows, would it improve search speeds
if I split it up into smaller tables of 10,000,000 rows each? This means
if I had to search for a record, I'd have to query the 5 tables one after
the other.
I'd greatly appreciate any help.
Gerald.
--
MySQL General
bject: Re: clustering/scalability question
On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 04:56:54PM -0700, John Masterson wrote:
> Hello,
>
> We're a web hosting company currently hosting nearly 2000 MySQL
> databases (3.23.54) at around 200-300 queries/second. Amazing
> performance, really. B
On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 04:56:54PM -0700, John Masterson wrote:
> Hello,
>
> We're a web hosting company currently hosting nearly 2000 MySQL
> databases (3.23.54) at around 200-300 queries/second. Amazing
> performance, really. But we're growing fast and planning for the next
> step. Our wishlist
Hello,
We're a web hosting company currently hosting nearly 2000 MySQL
databases (3.23.54) at around 200-300 queries/second. Amazing
performance, really. But we're growing fast and planning for the next
step. Our wishlist is short:
We want to allow all our customers to have one set of instructio
