Topic awaiting preservation: MySQL efficiency |
|
---|---|
Author | Thread |
Paranoid (IV) Inmate From: Minneapolis, MN, USA |
posted 11-26-2001 16:12
Does anyone know about MySQL efficiency, and whether it's a good idea to make separate databases for unrelated tables? From an administration standpoint, it's a lot easier to give a user a single database, but does that limit the efficiency if there are many large unrelated tables within the database? |
Paranoid (IV) Mad Scientist From: Omicron Persei 8 |
posted 11-26-2001 16:40 |
Paranoid (IV) Mad Scientist From: Somewhere over the rainbow |
posted 11-26-2001 17:25
The poster has demanded we remove all his contributions, less he takes legal action. |
Paranoid (IV) Inmate From: Minneapolis, MN, USA |
posted 11-26-2001 17:28
That's not an issue. I'm talking about groups of tables that are for separate applications. I do have them all in one database now because my sysadmin has only set up one database, but performance is a big issue. My main web application at http://www.coffman.umn.edu/insider/calendar.php already takes 20 seconds to run initially (I have a caching system so people rarely experience that delay), and I wonder if the large number of tables in the database is negatively affecting performance. |
Maniac (V) Mad Scientist From: 100101010011 <-- right about here |
posted 11-26-2001 22:06
I don't think the sheer number of tables should affect speed so much. I'm really no expert on this and should just shut up. |
Maniac (V) Mad Scientist with Finglongers From: Cell 53, East Wing |
posted 11-26-2001 22:24
jiblet: There may be a small performace drop from having lots of tables but as long as you are using them efficiently I can't see if there is too much of a problem. How many tables get involved in one query? I also wonder if the performance mistake is due to some coding problem (I know I stupidly once put the DB connection inside a loop and that slowed things down nicely) - just a thought. |
Paranoid (IV) Inmate From: Minneapolis, MN, USA |
posted 11-26-2001 23:06
Yeah, I'm pretty sure there is some kind of stupid mistake because it takes 40 seconds to list 100 events when there are no search criteria, but it takes less than 2 seconds if all the sponsors are checked resulting in the same 100 events. Weird, eh? |
Paranoid (IV) Inmate From: 127.0.0.1 |
posted 11-27-2001 01:54
I've lived the "one site - one db" rule, and it's worked out well. I NEVER have tables for more than one site in the same DB. And more than one DB makes for more connections, which, is bad - as everyone has mentioned. |