Re^4: Speed of MySQL DBs

You realy think multiple tables is better? I'm realy curious as to why and when this would be beneficial. I read several parts of the MySQL documentation on Optimizations but I never realy saw a conclusive line of when this would be good to do. I would have thought that a well indexed single table would always be better then multiple tables.

___________
Eric Hodges

Comment on Re^4: Speed of MySQL DBs

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: Speed of MySQL DBs by graff (Chancellor) on Feb 07, 2006 at 01:20 UTC
Based on rsiedl's description of the setup, it sounded like there was already a rational basis for segmenting the data into distinct tables, and the usage pattern for the data didn't seem to motivate full integration into a single huge table (rows fall into large independent sets, and queries never need to span across sets). I'll confess that I'm no jedi when it comes to optimizing an RDB through careful crafting of table layout, query construction and indexing. This probably explains why I can imagine situations where the conditions on an oft-needed query might not lend themselves easily to effective indexing, and reducing the size of a full-table scan would be worthwhile.	[reply]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^5: Speed of MySQL DBs
by graff (Chancellor) on Feb 07, 2006 at 01:20 UTC

rsiedl

I'll confess that I'm no jedi when it comes to optimizing an RDB through careful crafting of table layout, query construction and indexing. This probably explains why I can imagine situations where the conditions on an oft-needed query might not lend themselves easily to effective indexing, and reducing the size of a full-table scan would be worthwhile.

[reply]