Re: Partitioning or Merge Storage Engine.

[Mikael Ronström]

Hi,
In many cases partitioning will replace the merge engine.
Not necessarily in every case though, there has been no
attempt to cover everything that the merge engine does in
the partitioning although most things is covered.

Partitioning mainly improves in partition pruning, it's
handled in the optimiser whereas merge engine is not
integrated in the optimiser. There is also some management
commands that exist with partitioning that doesn't exist for
the merge engine except by manually writing special queries.

So I would suggest to use partitioning unless there are special
needs that the merge engine handles and not partitioning.

Rgrds Mikael

nick Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hi,
>
> Please forgive me for being fairly new to this
> topic :)
>
> I am fairly confused as to why one would want to
> use the merged storage
> engine over partitioning? I played with the merged
> storage engine a while ago
> and found a few limitations to it for my
> application, so gave up and sought other
> solutions.
>
> Partitioning looks great - is this going to be a
> replacement for merged
> tables? If not, how should we decide which is best
> to use?
>
> Thanks,
> Nick