Thanks for the feedback Alex. Are you suggesting that MyISAM is perhaps better?
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 3:57 PM, Alejandro Guerrieri < alejandro.guerri...@gmail.com> wrote: > InnoDB is a bad idea if you're expecting to have a big number of DLR's > waiting: The DLR engine uses "SELECT COUNT(*)" which happens to be painfully > slow on InnoDB. > > The data won't be minimal, and you'll end up having to manually purge old > records (sometimes not all DLR's are received back from the carrier). > > I suggest you to have two indexes: one on smsc + ts and the other one on > stamp (to be able to delete old records). > > Regards, > > Alex > > > On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 9:40 AM, brett skinner > <tatty.dishcl...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> Hi Users >> >> I know this question is more to do with MySQL than Kannel but does anyone >> here have a recommendation on the engine type for the MySQL table. Does >> Kannel have a preference? At the moment I am using innoDB. >> >> With regards to indexes on the table are there any recommendations? >> Looking at the debug it seems that the delete statement is using the smsc >> and the received columns so an index covering those columns should be fine. >> Although because this table seems to hold transient data so the amount of >> data in here should be minimal and table scans would probably be quicker >> than using the index. Also maintaining an index is additional work for the >> MySQL DB so I would be inclined to leave the table with no indexes. Does >> anyone have any experience in this area and anything recommendations? >> >> Regards, >> > >
