Thanks Ken. I certainly prefer the idea of using inbuilt DB server functionality to improve performance than an external tool hooked in.
I'll probably look into a PostgreSQL migration first and see where that takes me. I hope it's *just* a case of creating the schema by running a 3.8.8 install against it, dumping the data and loading it in ;) Justin ------------------------------------------------- Justin Hayes OpenBet Support Manager [email protected] On 10 Dec 2010, at 14:46, Kenneth Marshall wrote: > On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 08:26:58AM +0000, Justin Hayes wrote: >> Any view on which is faster Jesse (postgres or mysql/sphinx)? >> >> Also how much faster than the old Content search are we talking? Orders of >> magnitude, or just 'faster'? >> >> Thanks again, >> >> Justin >> > > Hi Justin, > > I have not benchmarked the MySQL/Sphinx relative to the PostgreSQL > implementation but the few I have found using a search showed their > performance to be pretty comparable. I have not had a chance to look > at how RT integrates with Sphinx, but when I wanted to test it with > a PostgreSQL database, it did not keep its indexes up realtime, but > required a periodic job to run for updates and periodic reindexes. > The PostgreSQL fulltext indexes are kept in sync at all times. This > helps avoid the "the ticket is there but the search did not find it" > syndrome. As far as the speed with the fulltext indexing versus no > fulltext indexing, a sample search that I ran while testing took > 20 minutes for the table scan versus a couple of seconds for the > search with the index support, 600X faster. Of course, the bigger > win is that your I/O system is not tapped out while you are > searching in the content and you database scales much, much more > gracefully. > > Cheers, > Ken > >> ------------------------------------------------- >> Justin Hayes >> OpenBet Support Manager >> [email protected] >> >> On 8 Dec 2010, at 16:48, Jesse Vincent wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed 8.Dec'10 at 16:44:57 +0000, Justin Hayes wrote: >>>> I was about to say that should have been 3.9 :) >>>> >>>> Been a while since I checked out bestpractical.com. Just saw the post >>>> about the dev release, and looks like things are going well which is great >>>> news. >>>> >>>> The only downside is the time needed to migrate to postgres, >>> >>> Or you could try the sphinx-based fts for mysql that's baked in >>> >>>> and then the time it's going to take to port all my custom code into the >>>> new version. >>>> >>>> But that's my problem, and one I have every time I upgrade, so can't >>>> complain! >>> >> >>
