MySQL Forums
Forum List  »  Partitioning

Partition VS Merge table -- High volume of inserts
Posted by: Eric Her
Date: December 18, 2006 01:44PM


My first issue is this one: what are the main differences (advantages/disadvantages) of using partition table instead of merge table. Merge table seems to be an old concept replaced by partition; a first attempt to resolve the problem of huge tables and their performance problem.

My second issue comes from our requirements. In the product I am working on, we are inserting approximately 2000 rows per second in 3 tables (for a total of 6000 inserts/sec). We implemented a temporary solution that looks like the partition table. We implemented the table switching ourselves to limit the size of each table and are creating and dropping tables when necessary. A software component manages which "table" should get the next entry based on the time we're receiving entries.

We would like to use the partition table and let MySQL manage which partition should get the entry but are concerned about the performance it could suffer. We are not filling "tables" one by one: we could insert in different "tables" as we are receiving data. We tried merge table but the performance hit was to important to consider this technique at that time (with MySQL 4.1).

Will it (partition table) save my life with a performance gain with high volume of insert (low volume of query) or will it suffer like the merge table did? What kind of gain/advantages could I expect by using partition table?

Thank you very much


Options: ReplyQuote

Written By
Partition VS Merge table -- High volume of inserts
December 18, 2006 01:44PM

Sorry, you can't reply to this topic. It has been closed.

Content reproduced on this site is the property of the respective copyright holders. It is not reviewed in advance by Oracle and does not necessarily represent the opinion of Oracle or any other party.