I would like to know the limitations of Mysql with extremely large tables. I need to store 20+ million records. Each record would have only 4-6 fields and would not be longer than 128 bytes of information. The records could be divided among several tables, but at what size is the performance hindered enough to need to split records between several smaller tables? Any information leading to an optimal solution would be greatly appreciated. Thanks Shane Anderson Software Developer Web Accessibility in Mind - http://www.WebAIM.org
i personally would not use mysql for this application. YET.
I have never even been about to get to a million records without significant (and unbearable) slowdown.
We did a preliminary test on a table with around 2 million records and it seemed to work ok. However I am worried that in the real world(several hit per second) it would crash or slow too much. What might be a good alternative to mysql?(cheap)
PostGRES, Sybase ASE 11 (free for linux), etc.
-- Matt
use mysql benchmark an alternative rpm or apachebench 2 if it s on the net
