<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>

<rss version="2.0" 
   xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
   xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
   xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
   xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
   xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
   xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
   >
<channel>
    <title>Full Table Scan - MySQL</title>
    <link>http://www.fulltablescan.com/</link>
    <description>The fix for the database junkie in you</description>
    <dc:language>en</dc:language>
    <admin:errorReportsTo rdf:resource="mailto:admin@fulltablescan.com" />
    <generator>Serendipity 1.4.1 - http://www.s9y.org/</generator>
    <managingEditor>spam-me-not-tom@fulltablescan.com</managingEditor>
<pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2008 13:16:20 GMT</pubDate>

    

<item>
    <title>The Value of MySQL Storage Engines</title>
    <link>http://www.fulltablescan.com/index.php?/archives/92-The-Value-of-MySQL-Storage-Engines.html</link>
            <category>MySQL</category>
    
    <comments>http://www.fulltablescan.com/index.php?/archives/92-The-Value-of-MySQL-Storage-Engines.html#comments</comments>
    <wfw:comment>http://www.fulltablescan.com/wfwcomment.php?cid=92</wfw:comment>

    <slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://www.fulltablescan.com/rss.php?version=2.0&amp;type=comments&amp;cid=92</wfw:commentRss>
    

    <author>tom@fulltablescan.com (Tom)</author>
    <content:encoded>
    Or, &lt;em&gt;The World May Be Coming to an End&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Something very disturbing happened yesterday.  I started liking the idea of MySQL storage engines.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It happened after reading the &lt;a href=&quot;http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2008/04/17/the-state-of-mysql/#comment-363869&quot;  title=&quot;http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2008/04/17/the-state-of-mysql/#comment-363869&quot;&gt;second comment&lt;/a&gt; of &lt;a href=&quot;http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2008/04/17/the-state-of-mysql/&quot;  title=&quot;http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2008/04/17/the-state-of-mysql/&quot;&gt;this post&lt;/a&gt;.  In retrospect &lt;a href=&quot;http://weblog.infoworld.com/openresource/archives/2008/04/when_does_a_pro.html&quot;  title=&quot;http://weblog.infoworld.com/openresource/archives/2008/04/when_does_a_pro.html&quot;&gt;this article&lt;/a&gt; had a lot of influence on my thinking as well, but it was the idea of pluggable storage engines as a way to advance new and better storage mechanisms - not just new and different database systems - that really changed my thinking.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
So, in the coming weeks, I&#039;ll be doing what I can to learn more about the MySQL storage engines I&#039;ve heard mentioned recently (namely &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.scaledb.com/&quot;  title=&quot;ScaleDB&quot;&gt;ScaleDB&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.tokutek.com&quot;  title=&quot;Tokutek&quot;&gt;Tokutek&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.kickfire.com&quot;  title=&quot;KickFire&quot;&gt;KickFire&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.infobright.com&quot;  title=&quot;InfoBright&quot;&gt;InfoBright&lt;/a&gt; and a few others) and posting what I learn here.  If there are others you think I should pay attention to please let me know. 
    </content:encoded>

    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2008 18:11:00 -0400</pubDate>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fulltablescan.com/index.php?/archives/92-guid.html</guid>
    
</item>
<item>
    <title>RAM Storage is not the Answer... At Least not for MySQL</title>
    <link>http://www.fulltablescan.com/index.php?/archives/82-RAM-Storage-is-not-the-Answer...-At-Least-not-for-MySQL.html</link>
            <category>Databases (General)</category>
            <category>MySQL</category>
    
    <comments>http://www.fulltablescan.com/index.php?/archives/82-RAM-Storage-is-not-the-Answer...-At-Least-not-for-MySQL.html#comments</comments>
    <wfw:comment>http://www.fulltablescan.com/wfwcomment.php?cid=82</wfw:comment>

    <slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://www.fulltablescan.com/rss.php?version=2.0&amp;type=comments&amp;cid=82</wfw:commentRss>
    

    <author>tom@fulltablescan.com (Tom)</author>
    <content:encoded>
    There&#039;s an &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2008/03/31/mysql-performance-on-memory-appliance/&quot;  title=&quot;http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2008/03/31/mysql-performance-on-memory-appliance/&quot;&gt;interesting article&lt;/a&gt; over at &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/&quot;  title=&quot;http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/&quot;&gt;MySQL Performance Blog&lt;/a&gt; that talks about some MySQL benchmarks using RAM-based storage.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Here&#039;s the most interesting part (to me, anyway):&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;blockquote&gt;However even with MyISAM we got CPU bound before we could reach the system capacity - these 70K queries/sec generated just over 50K IOs/sec while capacity was over 100K IOs/sec&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
I think Peter hits the nail on the head when he theorizes about the cause of the performance problems he saw:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;blockquote&gt;My guess is Innodb just was not really designed and tested in such condition - normal case is to allocate cache memory to buffer pool so IOs will mostly come from drives directly&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
We all know that I&#039;m not a big fan of MySQL, so I&#039;m prone to believe that other systems might handle this better.  But the point still holds - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.fulltablescan.com/index.php?/archives/54-RAM-Storage-Is-Not-The-Answer.html&quot;  title=&quot;http://www.fulltablescan.com/index.php?/archives/54-RAM-Storage-Is-Not-The-Answer.html&quot;&gt;RAM storage is not the answer&lt;/a&gt;.  Having super-fast I/O won&#039;t solve your performance problems unless the DBMS you&#039;re using is designed to take advantage of it.  And given that every DBMS I can think of is designed around the assumption that I/O is expensive and contortions to avoid it are cheap, odds are that the database you&#039;re using isn&#039;t designed to take advantage of it.  So don&#039;t bet that super-fast storage - RAM-based or otherwise - will solve your performance problems.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In short: think smaller, not faster.  &lt;br /&gt;
 
    </content:encoded>

    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 11:10:00 -0400</pubDate>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fulltablescan.com/index.php?/archives/82-guid.html</guid>
    
</item>

</channel>
</rss>