From: David Vallner <david@...>
Date: 2006-12-05T15:06:57+09:00
Subject: Re: MySQL and SQLite question

--------------enigE7759B2834E67F1DB875C4B4
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

nephish wrote:
> The SQL is MySQL ver 5. I have read that its much faster than 3.=20

If you make use of the new features over 3, it can also be notably
slower. However, databases are fickle things: there are multiple ways
they can pose as a bottleneck in an application, and the pure
hypothethical query engine execution speed might not help much if
transaction isolation keeps most of your users waiting on a lock that
wouldn't occur with "slower" SQL code / table type. Some servers also
scale differently to different dataset volumes; e.g. I think Oracle is
known for being comparably sluggish under 2 GB, when other servers might
tend to start choking at that DB size, etc.

The only way to determine what database is fastest for you is
benchmarking and load testing. There's just no way around this, usage
patterns of the database affect performance -that- much for any
intrinsic qualities of the product to matter regardless of circumstances.=


Of course, if you have an existing setup with a recent MySQL server
that's been deemed Fast Enough, odds are there's no need to fret around
with it unless you need to improve performance. A Rails switch shouldn't
affect performance detrimentally in a tricky way the confirmation
benchmark you mentioned couldn't catch.

David Vallner


--------------enigE7759B2834E67F1DB875C4B4
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (MingW32)

iD8DBQFFdQx9y6MhrS8astoRAjsoAJ97+qTdL8O8AK1LN32h6hGQXm637ACfYWON
b+OlJmiCMsfaA1v7tjq2YMU=
=lEWS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--------------enigE7759B2834E67F1DB875C4B4--