darmonkey wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Which of the following would yield the best
> performance:
>
> Option 1: 1 DB with roughly 30000 tables
> Option 2: 1000 DBs with roughly 30 tables each
Both will perform the same. There is no difference in the way they are handled beneath the surface of MySQL. Additionally, both scenarios will perform poorer than a single database with 30 tables, and segment/partition the tables based on a foreign key to differentiate the database...
> Follow up question: What engine should be used:
> InnoDB or MyISAM?
Has nothing to do with above scenario, but depends on your needs for transactional safety or not.
> If there is additional information that would be
> needed to make a good recommendation, please let
> me know and I will post it.
Read through the manual on storage engines to determine if there's a specific option of one engine that you require/desire; that will make the decision on storage engines much easier, since you will know the major differences. Also, I *HIGHLY* recommend limiting the number of databases/tables to a smaller, manageable number and re-thinking both of your above scenarios...
Jay Pipes
Community Relations Manager, North America, MySQL Inc.
Got Cluster?
http://www.mysql.com/cluster
Personal:
http://jpipes.com
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/27/2005 04:49PM by Jay Pipes.