-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 03/28/14 10:16, Jari Fredriksson wrote: > Appeared that the bacula script created the tables as MyISAM. I > converted to InnoDB, tweaked some MySQL parameters, and not this > seems to be OK again. > > Seems there is really a difference between MyISAM and InnoDB.
There is an ENORMOUS difference between MyISAM and InnoDB. I would go so far as to say that MyISAM should never be used in production any more, and I wish Oracle would officially deprecate it except for grant tables. (And they're *working on* grant tables in InnoDB. Maybe in MySQL 6.) Data point: At my company I did some simulated-OLTP benchmarking between identical servers with identical data sets and test loads, one with MyISAM tables and tuned optimally for MyISAM, the other likewise with InnoDB. With a 100% read load, which is the best possible use case for MyISAM, the InnoDB server outperformed MyISAM by 60%. By the time the workload reached 25% write, InnoDB was outperforming MyISAM by 400%. It should always be remembered that once of the principal design goals of the MyISAM storage engine was to deliver *acceptable* performance on a small server shared with other applications, at a time when a "large" server was one that might have a full 32MB of RAM. That is now smaller than the current default size of some individual MySQL *buffers*. - -- Phil Stracchino Babylon Communications ph...@caerllewys.net p...@co.ordinate.org Landline: 603.293.8485 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEAREIAAYFAlM1ilYACgkQ0DfOju+hMkntvACgn2Bhn2NcrRUFl+vJul/tie4g qCoAnRTKoeiWOLoanEkSdcQhyJK2yHkI =JkQ3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
