> On Jun 17, 2017, at 12:07 AM, Colin Law <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 17 June 2017 at 02:31, AC <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> On 2017-06-16 09:35, Derek Atkins wrote: >>> Adam Funk <[email protected]> writes: >>> >>>>> Not necessarily. The "default" backend would be SQLite, which is a DB >>>>> that stores into a single file. So it will act like the current XML >>>>> backend in terms of storage, but not necessarily the same with backup >>>>> files. However no server is required. >>>> >>>> Great! Thanks to you & Colin for that information. >>> >>> Also keep in mind that the mysql data isn't compressed, so your disk >>> space usage will grow significantly when using a SQL backend vs the >>> (compressed) XML. >>> >> >> You can enable compression in MySQL 5.5. This applies to InnoDB table >> types using a file per table and the Barracuda file format. This >> configuration must be enabled before the tables are created. > > Given the small size (in MySQL terms) of a GC database and the complex > nature of some of the queries I suggest we would be better to accept a > larger database and (presumably) quicker access. Though I suppose if > the db indices are arranged appropriately the overhead may be small.
In the current design it’s hard to imagine the DB affecting performance much, especially after initial load. After that there are only updates and inserts of single records in response to UI actions. That will change when we switch to querying the database from the current querying of the in-memory objects. Regards, John Ralls _______________________________________________ gnucash-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user ----- Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
