mohit | Shared With: Everyone - Jul 22 2008 | mysql, development, databases, reliability, myisam, innodb
We inadvertently provisioned a few database machines with MyISAM instead of InnoDB, and it has been a nightmare. I strongly advice against using MyISAM -- ever.
With MyISAM, we periodically get these incorrect "duplicate key" errors that don't go away until you run the lenghty "repair table" command that somehow fixes everything.
Quoted: Use MyISAM when: The data isn't too critical ( "unreliable and slow, related to table size, table repair process" )
...
Use InnoDB for tables when: The table will be big (100Mb+ - "For reliability and performance, we use InnoDB for almost everything at Wikipedia - we just can't afford the downtime implied by MyISAM use and check table for 400GB of data when we get a crash." )
Related Content from Around Faves
reliability
-
We inadvertently provisioned a few database machines with MyISAM instead of InnoDB, and it has been a nightmare. I strongly advice against using MyISAM -- ever.
With MyISAM, we periodically get these incorrect "duplicate key" errors that don't go away until you run the lenghty "repair table" command that somehow fixes everything.
1 FaverViewed: 3 TimesQuoted: Use MyISAM when: The data isn't too critical ( "unreliable and slow, related to table size, table repair process" )
...
Use InnoDB for tables when: The table will be big (100Mb+ - "For reliability and performance, we use InnoDB for almost everything at Wikipedia - we just can't afford the downtime implied by MyISAM use and check table for 400GB of data when we get a crash." ) - mike - Aug 11 20081 FaverViewed: 1 Time
- mike - Apr 14 20073 FaversViewed: 6 Times
