As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
Just wondering what the best storage engine to use for my website would be? I manually enter values into the database - there is no user input being put into the database itself. It basically holds short values, as well as some short URLs (for images based on the content). I noticed on the empty table I have InnoDB has a 3,690MB overhead..which seems a little extreme considering it's not being accessed.
Would MyISAM be better? Suggestions?
EDIT: All I'm really doing, aside from manually inputting the values in phpMyAdmin is querying the rows and displaying the data on the page using variables.
As a general recommendation, use InnoDB, 3.690Mb is nothing.
For more details: MyISAM versus InnoDB
Related
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
Can anyone give a reference to a substantially large sample database which I can import into MySQL to test and learn optimization and benchmarking? The database should have at least 6-8 tables with lots of foreign keys in between them, i.e a complete database. The MySQL employees database looked promising, but the download page has 3 download links, clicking on any of which opens a page in a browser with a god-awful amount of binary data, dont know what to do with that.
StackOverflow itself publishes a database that could be used for this kind of testing. It's a fast download using BitTorrent since there's a lot of seeders.
there is large dataset on mysql website
Checkout https://launchpad.net/test-db/+download
it has about 6 tables i believe, suggest downloading the full archive.
The export data is around 167 MB.
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 9 years ago.
I'm creating an application where users can edit their "files" for various purposes. Each user will have his / her own sandbox of files. The question is whether these files should actually exist on a drive or as long pieces of text in a MySQL DB?
Everytime I face this problem it turns for me that storing files in filesystem ( or S3 ) is better solution. But for example Sharepoint stores all files in DB, so it depends on your project. You could also take a look at MongoDB, but I haven't tried it yet.
Okay, based on my research, here's what I found...
Based on these two articles mainly (and other research):
http://sietch.net/ViewNewsItem.aspx?NewsItemID=124
http://blog.druva.com/2009/01/25/file-systems-vs-databases/
I think a DB would be better than a file system. The DB is optimized for fast reads and writes and is relational so lookups are QUICK. Space is cheap, so it growing fast isn't a HUGE concern.
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 12 years ago.
In the past years, I've run into remarks about MySQL not being a DBMS to take seriously by some developers. I've been a MySQL user for quite some time now and I have trouble figuring out why some developers are so much against MySQL. While I'm beginning to believe part of these remarks are true, but only to a small degree, I'm wondering about the real reasons as to why some still think MySQL is inferior.
I concurr that I found check constraints to be missing and BOOLEANs to constrain to an INTEGER in the range of a TINYINT instead of to TRUE and FALSE. Additionally there are some CURRENT_TIMESTAMP issues that I don't like. But are these enough arguments to tout MySQL as an inferior DBMS? What are the real reasons here - if they exist?
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 12 years ago.
As I know these two databases are the most popular and the best, but which one is the best? And what are the benefits to use one or other? Currently I use MySQL and I don't really have any experiences with Oracle, but I want to know what's the best choice and why?
I mean how fast they are, what kind of features they have, how easy is to use them with php, and so one, you know better :)
Some real examples:
1.000.000 users come to my
website, they visit 100 pages every day and each
page is 1mb's , now which
on is the faster?
I run a query on the database to
search for 10.000 users, now which
one is faster?
See, when you add in "how easy to use with PHP," I'm going to have to go with MySQL. At least, you will find the most resources online to help you on your journey.
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
I tried to look for benchmark on the performances of various filesystems with MySQL InnoDB but couldn't find any.
My database workload is the typical web-based OLTP, about 90% read, 10% write. Random IO.
Among popular filesystems such as ext3, ext4, xfs, jfs, Reiserfs, Reiser4, etc. which one do you think is the best for MySQL?
You should have a look at Lessons Learned in Building a Highly Scalable MySQL Database.
They benchmarked mysql with some of these filesystems and jfs looks like a clear the winner.
If you are working with InnoDB this two part interaction at the mysqlperformanceblog with Heikki Tuuri who created it should good reading.