Subject: Re: Inserts optimization?
From: Scott Marlowe <smarlowe@g2switchworks.com>
To: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chris.kings-lynne@calorieking.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Markus Schaber <schabi@logix-tt.com>,
	Magnus Hagander <mha@sollentuna.net>,
	Pgsql performance <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
In-Reply-To: <4446DED2.3040307@calorieking.com>
References: <6BCB9D8A16AC4241919521715F4D8BCEA352AE@algol.sollentuna.se>
	<44462849.3070209@logix-tt.com>
	<1145460130.23538.119.camel@state.g2switchworks.com>
	<26519.1145460679@sss.pgh.pa.us>  <4446DED2.3040307@calorieking.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <1145542587.23538.131.camel@state.g2switchworks.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 09:16:27 -0500

On Wed, 2006-04-19 at 20:07, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> > Scott Marlowe <smarlowe@g2switchworks.com> writes:
> >> It's the refusal of people to stop using MyISAM table types that's the
> >> real issue.
> > 
> > Isn't MyISAM still the default over there?  It's hardly likely that the
> > average MySQL user would use anything but the default table type ...
> 
> Since MySQL 5, InnoDB tables are default I recall.

It gets built by default, but when you do a plain create table, it will
still default to myisam tables.

Note that there is a setting somewhere in my.cnf that will make the
default table type anything you want.

For Bacula though, what I was suggesting was that they simply declare
that you need innodb table type support if you want decent performance,
then coding to that, and if someone doesn't have innodb table support,
then they have no right to complain about poor performance.  Seems a
fair compromise to me.  The Bacula folks would get to program to a real
database model with proper serlialization and all that, and the people
who refuse to move up to a later model MySQL get crappy performance.