Tod Harter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I'd be pretty surprised if this caching scheme is faster than > running queries into MySQL, that sucker is BRUTALLY fast! If you > build derived tables and use those as caches (so you just basically > are doing "SELECT * FROM table") it will almost certainly exceed the > speed at which you can deserialize the data with storable. For these > sorts of queries where you are only reading and doing none or simple > indexing its generally about 100 times faster than Oracle, and 10 to > 50 times faster than postgres. This is especially true with large > tables. I have a customer with 2 tables of close to a terabyte of > data in them and upwards of 100 million rows. SELECT times into > these tables on a dual processor PIV Xeon with 2 gigs of ram and a > ciprico RAID 5 box are routinely on the order of sub 1 second.
Yes, but not everybody uses MySQL. It may be quick to do SELECTs, but it has many other faults for a lot of people. -Dom -- | Semantico: creators of major online resources | | URL: http://www.semantico.com/ | | Tel: +44 (1273) 722222 | | Address: 33 Bond St., Brighton, Sussex, BN1 1RD, UK. | --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
