On 12/1/05, Rob Kinyon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On the other hand, I still suffer from table corruption with MySQL. > > It still munges my data at a whim just so it doesn't have to throw an > > exception. I still have to do things with temporary tables that > > should be done with a sub-select (we don't run mysql 5 yet, since it > > is too new for me). > > Whenever I see something like this, my first thought is "What > tabletype are you using?" InnoDB tables have the same recovery > capabilities as any other ACID-supporting table. MyISAM is the one > that can be corrupted, but you shouldn't be using MyISAM tables for > heavy CRUD. It wasn't designed for that - InnoDB was.
Hi Rob, Yes, it was MyISAM, since that was what was available when this system was built. I gave some details in another reply, so I won't repeat them here. However, MySQL was always touted at being safe for your data when MyISAM tables were the main choice. It is only since InnoDB tables have come out that everyone says you're crazy to use MyISAM tables for heavy write databases. > Furthermore, subselects are in MySQL 4.1 which has been out for over 2 > years, not MySQL 5. Well, it has only been 'production ready' according to MySQL since October 27, 2004 [1], so I'm behind the times by about a year. But your point is taken, I should have checked first. I just did my first production MySQL 4.1 install this week, so I am catching up. By the way, I still use PostgreSQL 7.4.x as well, and haven't gone to 8.0 or 8.1. I hear it is very good, but I always feel more comfortable staying behind a little while with most of the software I use (probably the result of me being a big Debian fan ;) ). Cheers, Cees [1] http://www.mysql.com/news-and-events/?year=2004 --------------------------------------------------------------------- Web Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=cgiapp&r=1&w=2 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
