I saw so many questions and answers on this topic MyISAM vs InnoDB on stackoverflow itself.
But, all of the questions and answers are too old and not related to the current stable version of MySQL 5.7.x
By the time so much development must have been done in both MyISAM and InnoDB.
So, I need those differences available presently with version 5.7.x
So, please don't mark my question duplicate and someone please explain the differences these storage engines have currently as well as the differences they have since past.
Also, please explain at what situation which storage engine should be chosen for a table.
Can different tables belonging to the same schema have different storage engines i.e. few tables will have InnoDB and few ones will have MyISAM.
If yes, then how the JOIN queries would get execute between tables with MyISAM and InnoDB?
Is it true that MySQL is going to remove MyISAM storage engine from the future version?
Your assumption that MyISAM has been receiving new development is not correct. MyISAM is not receiving any significant new development. MySQL is clearly moving in the direction of phasing out MyISAM, and using MyISAM is discouraged.
Oracle Corp. has not announced any specific date or version by which they will remove MyISAM. My guess is that MyISAM will never be fully removed, because there are too many sites that wouldn't be able to upgrade, without doing expensive testing to make sure their specific app won't experience any regression issues by converting to InnoDB.
But you might notice that in the MySQL 5.7 manual, the section on MyISAM has been demoted to Alternative Storage Engines, which should be a clue that it's receiving less priority.
In MySQL 5.7, MyISAM is still used for some of the system tables, like mysql.user, mysql.db, etc. But new system tables introduced in 5.6 and 5.7 are InnoDB. All system tables are InnoDB in MySQL 8.0.
MyISAM still does not support any of the properties of ACID. There are no transactions, no consistency features, and no durable writes. See my answer to MyISAM versus InnoDB.
MyISAM still does not support foreign keys, for what it's worth. But I seldom see real production sites using foreign keys even with InnoDB.
MyISAM supports only table-level locking (except for some INSERT appending to the end of a table, as noted in the manual).
MySQL 5.7 supports both fulltext indexes and spatial indexes in both MyISAM and InnoDB. These features are not reasons to continue using MyISAM as they once were.
Both logical backup tools like mysqldump and physical backup tools like Percona XtraBackup can't back up MyISAM tables without acquiring a global lock.
You asked if you could create a variety of tables with different storage engines in the same schema. Yes, you can, and this is the same as it has been for many versions of MySQL.
You asked if you can join tables of different storage engines (by the way, tables don't need to be in the same schema to be joined). Yes, you can join such tables, MySQL takes care of all the details. This is the same as it has been for many versions of MySQL.
But some weird cases can come up when you do this, like what if you update a MyISAM table and an InnoDB table in a transaction, and then roll back? The changes in the InnoDB table are rolled back, but the changes in the MyISAM table are not rolled back, so your data integrity can be broken if you aren't careful. This is also the same as it has been for many versions of MySQL.
Cases where MyISAM has an advantage over InnoDB is a short list, and it's getting shorter.
Some table-scan queries and bulk inserts are faster in MyISAM. InnoDB is better at indexed searches.
MyISAM may use less storage space than the equivalent data stored in an uncompressed InnoDB table. You can further compact MyISAM tables with myisampack, but this makes the MyISAM table read-only.
There are other options these days for compact storage of data in transactional storage engines, for example InnoDB table compression, or MyRocks.
SELECT COUNT(*) FROM MyTable queries (with no WHERE clause) are very fast in MyISAM, because the accurate count of rows is persisted in the MyISAM metadata. InnoDB (or other MVCC implementations) doesn't keep this count persisted, because every transaction viewing the table might "see" a different row count. Only a storage engine that has table-level locking and no transaction isolation like MyISAM, can optimize this case.
Auto-increment that numbers independently for each distinct value in another key column. Again, this requires table-level locking, so it's not supported in InnoDB.
CREATE TABLE MyTable (
group_id INT NOT NULL,
seq_id INT NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
PRIMARY KEY (group_id, seq_id)
) ENGINE=MyISAM;
It's still easy to move a MyISAM table from server to server, because the .MYD and .MYI files are self-contained. You can kind of do something similar with InnoDB tables, but you have to use the intricate feature of transportable tablespaces. But this easy-to-move-tables quality of MyISAM no longer works in MySQL 8.0, because of their new data dictionary feature.
Under certain load, MyISAM might be a better choice for internal_tmp_disk_storage_engine, which defaults to InnoDB in MySQL 5.7. If you run lots of queries that create temp tables on disk (in-memory temp tables won't benefit), it can put a strain on the InnoDB engine. But you'd have to have a high query rate for this to matter, and if your queries create so many temp tables on disk, you should try to optimize the queries differently.
MyISAM allows you to set multiple key caches, and define caches for specific tables. But the MyISAM key caches are only for index structures, not for data.
References:
https://www.percona.com/blog/2016/10/11/mysql-8-0-end-myisam/
https://www.percona.com/blog/2017/12/04/internal-temporary-tables-mysql-5-7/
http://jfg-mysql.blogspot.com/2017/08/why-we-still-need-myisam.html
I had this question for a job quiz and got it right: (referring the new version):
MyISAM and InnoDB are two different storage engins that handle CRUD operations differently.
Locking: When approching a row inside a MyISAM storage engin, all the table will be locked by other sessions until the change is commited, unlike InnoDB, which locks only the specific selected row(/s). The lock is released until the session is commited. Locking a table or a row causes suspention by other sessions that try to interact with the same table or row to prevent wrong data manipulations in the table for example.
Transactions: InnoDB supports transactions, unlike MyISAM. Transactions are a colection of 2 or more commands like SELECT, INSERT, UPDATE and DELETE, to a single operation until complishion.
Atomic Operations: When setting a transaction in an InnoDB and
the operation is incompleted - it terminates all the changes and
restore the DB as it was (all or nothin'), so for example, if in the
middle of a transaction there is a syntax error in the code /
datatype mismatch or anything that might interupt the bundle of
commands to finish its operation - all the changes wont be applied,
thanks transactions atomicy. On the other hand, when using an
MyISAM storage engin, if a bundle of commands "breaks" (for any
reason), the operation stops immediately and all the
tables/rows/data that were affected will remain affected, which
might cause a corrupt data in the database (...and a headache).
B. Running an operation on MyISAM are set on the spot,
whereas InnoDB allows you to use the "ROLLBACK"s to discard any
change, which comes best in handy when running transactions.
Transaction Logs: When creating a transaction without a
transaction log in between, you can apply any changes on the table/s
in the DB, and if the table have a clustered index (for example),
the data will have to search where exactly it has to be inserted and
only then apply the change. In a case where there is a transaction
log in between the DB and the transaction, the changes will be sent
to the transaction log first and will set its order in the table
before sending the change to the DB - which will be less time
consuming. The DB saves logs from all the transactions that were
made, which can help to choose to restore any transaction previously
made, and recover all changes. When set to a "simple" recovery model- transactions are deleted from the transactions log and wont be able to recover data (used usually on DEV environments). When set to
"full" recovery model, all transactions are saved and listed, ready
to be restored - this is used usually on production environments
which might cause problems like preformance issues - so backing them
up and deleting from the server could be a solution. When set to a
"bulk-logged" recovery model saved transaction logs only for
specific "important" changes and commands (import,export,
insert-select, select-into, reorganaizing/rebuilding indexes), and
might prevent preformance issues.
Foreign keys: MyISAM dosn't use foreign keys, unlike InnoDB. When a table column has a foregin key set to point on an other table column, when any update/delete occures on the pointed table, it will know that the changes have to be applied on the other table pointing at it. This create a some kind of a link between the two table and keep data in sync. Setting tables with FKs might require more effort which might be considered as a disadvantage (?).
FULLTEXT indexing: InnoDB doesn't support FULLTEXT indexing in its previous versions - MyISAM does support it. Switching to MyISAM wont be the best solution so just update MySQL to a verion which does support FULLTEXT indexing.
FULLTEXT indexing can take texts like titles, comments, ect' - and search it (this should be a better option than the "LIKE" command in this case).
Spatial data types: Supported only on InnoDB.
To sum all up, InnoDB will be usually more reliable in terms of data handling, validity & recovery. For newer versions InnoDB will support FULLTEXT indexing for mainly searches - when using older versions with no option to update MySQL, using MyISAM will be great.
I am creating an commerce website and i am stuck in a database problem i am storing customer orders please tell me which is better MYISAM or Innodb i have to use transaction like feature in customer order table and i personally prefer myisam because it is much faster than innodb and it also supports full-text searching is there any way to use transaction like rollback feature in myisam so that if anything goes wrong table will be rollback to its previous state how to do that without any external library or any other server side access and i have to use MYSQL
I would use innodb because it supports transactions. It is not slower than myisam on selects, and supports fulltext searches from mysql v5.6. It is obviously slower on modifiations, since it uses transactions.
Myisam does not support transactions and I don't think it ever will. You have innodb for that purpose.
I was testing transaction support in innoDB tables, and just for the curriosity I tried to run the same transaction on MyIsam table, and surprisingly it worked. I am assuming that on myIsam table queries are executed one after another not in one atomic operation and I don't get any errors from START TRANSACTION and COMMIT and ROLLBACK operations. I am interested, is MyIsam engine just ignoring this operations or does it perform some actions?
MyISAM effectively works in auto-commit mode (as it's not a transactional engine), and it just ignores the commit/rollback.
Actually storage engine is a different layer in the MySQL architecture, separated from the SQL parser, the SQL layer communicates to the storage engine with lower-level API, and that's the reason there is a common SQL and engines, supporting different subset of featured. You can see very high-level overview of the architecture here
MyIsam tabels were not built for this. Not even in the 5+ versions. It only was meant to store data. It gives you no guarantee for transactions or data recovery. You should use InnoDB for this and, if needed, use MyIsam for replication purposes (it's faster to retrieve data with MyIsam tables since there's no cross-table checks).
You may read this post from MySQL
http://forums.mysql.com/read.php?21,68686,69229#msg-69229
This question already has answers here:
Closed 11 years ago.
Possible Duplicate:
What is InnoDB and MyISAM in MySQL?
in my project database some of table has engine type innoDB and some others Myisam.
why it was set like this ?
The 2 major types of table storage engines for MySQL databases are InnoDB and MyISAM. To summarize the differences of features and performance,
InnoDB is newer while MyISAM is older.
InnoDB is more complex while MyISAM is simpler.
InnoDB is more strict in data integrity while MyISAM is loose.
InnoDB implements row-level lock for inserting and updating while MyISAM implements table-level lock.
InnoDB has transactions while MyISAM does not.
InnoDB has foreign keys and relationship contraints while MyISAM does not.
InnoDB has better crash recovery while MyISAM is poor at recovering data integrity at system crashes.
MyISAM has full-text search index while InnoDB has not.
In light of these differences, InnoDB and MyISAM have their unique advantages and disadvantages against each other. They each are more suitable in some scenarios than the other.
Advantages of InnoDB
InnoDB should be used where data integrity comes a priority because it inherently takes care of them by the help of relationship constraints and transactions.
Faster in write-intensive (inserts, updates) tables because it utilizes row-level locking and only hold up changes to the same row that’s being inserted or updated.
Disadvantages of InnoDB
Because InnoDB has to take care of the different relationships between tables, database administrator and scheme creators have to take more time in designing the data models which are more complex than those of MyISAM.
Consumes more system resources such as RAM. As a matter of fact, it is recommended by many that InnoDB engine be turned off if there’s no substantial need for it after installation of MySQL.
No full-text indexing.
Advantages of MyISAM
Simpler to design and create, thus better for beginners. No worries about the foreign relationships between tables.
Faster than InnoDB on the whole as a result of the simpler structure thus much less costs of server resources.
Full-text indexing.
Especially good for read-intensive (select) tables.
Disadvantages of MyISAM
No data integrity (e.g. relationship constraints) check, which then comes a responsibility and overhead of the database administrators and application developers.
Doesn’t support transactions which is essential in critical data applications such as that of banking.
Slower than InnoDB for tables that are frequently being inserted to or updated, because the entire table is locked for any insert or update.
The comparison is pretty straightforward. InnoDB is more suitable for data critical situations that require frequent inserts and updates. MyISAM, on the other hand, performs better with applications that don’t quite depend on the data integrity and mostly just select and display the data.
Reference:
Comparison InnoDB and MyISAM
You can also check it out here for further details:
MyISAM Or InnoDB MySQL engine?
Hope this helps.
When you use a MySQL database you can select the storage engine that fits your needs. From what you have said it sounds like you have inherited this project, so the previous developer probably selected different engines when creating tables. They could have also used 3rd party tools and MySQL Workbench with different settings that caused the tables to be created with different storage engines.
Anyway, a quick Google search or a search on this site should give you information as to the differences between the two, as well as their advantages and disadvantages (essentially, table vs. row -level locking, relationship enforcement, transactions and rollback).
Moving forward you can set the default storage engine in your configuration file so that when you create new tables they will be of the same type.
InnoDB is the default engine for MySQL 5.5.
Here is a good conversation to get you started: MyISAM versus InnoDB
MyISAM
Default engine
No Transaction support
Good for Heavy data reading
Bad for write calls: table level locking
InnoDB
Transaction safe
Good for Heavy write calls: row level locking
Supports foreign keys referential integrity constraints
Is InnoDB bad for data reading??? What other storage engines should i be familar with?
No, InnoDB is not "bad" for data reading; in fact, I tend to use it as a default engine for all of my tables. Transactions and true relational features outweigh any minor read-performance benefit that you might get from MyISAM (in my opinion).
Edited to add: MyISAM is faster than InnoDB because it is simpler. But, unless you're doing some really high-volume stuff or are using an ancient machine as your database server, you're not likely to see a difference in daily operation.
Other storage engines to be familiar with are Memory for really fast, non-persistent data storage and CSV which I will use on occasion as part of data export processes.
This page has a comprehensive overview of MySQL Storage Engines.