+1 - another reason for InnoDB is there's no transaction rollback with MyISAM.
Matt On 9/20/05, Dave Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > +1 for InnoDB > > - Dave > > > On Sep 20, 2005, at 1:54 PM, Allen Gilliland wrote: > > > team, > > > > how do folks feel about making the mysql schema default to using InnoDB > > type mysql tables? which table type to choose is a pretty complex > > issue, but the big bonus for InnoDB is that it offers referential > > integrity. right now a default install of Roller on mysql will yield > > all MyISAM tables, which means that our foreign keys mean nothing. > > InnoDB would help fix this. > > > > what do others think? should we make InnoDB the default table type? > > > > -- Allen > > > >
