Le 08/06/2011 18:16, Gavin McCullagh a écrit : > Hi, > > On Wed, 08 Jun 2011, Phil Stracchino wrote: > >> The very first thing I would do would be upgrade to MySQL 5.5.[current] >> (5.5.13, right now) if you're not already using 5.5, making sure it's >> properly configured (hint: look at the new configuration directive >> innodb_buffer_pool_instances), then throw as much RAM as possible at the >> InnoDB buffer pool and convert all of the tables to InnoDB. Then >> download MySQltuner (http://mysqltuner.com/mysqltuner.pl) and look at >> its recommendations for some basic tuning. >> >> MyISAM, frankly, *SHOULD* be deprecated at this point. There is still a >> lot of FUD about InnoDB performance out there, most of it from people >> who don't actually understand the performance implications of the >> differences between MyISAM and InnoDB, but the truth is there is >> virtually no use case on a conventional MySQL server[1] for which "What >> primary storage engine should I be using?" has any answer other than >> "InnoDB". It's probably not too inaccurate to say that unless you >> *NEED* either merge tables or full-text indices, you should be using InnoDB. > For simplicity of operation and patching, we're using the Ubuntu archive > packages which are MySQL 5.1.41. I realise that's quite old now. There > are one or two restores in particular which take a long time (like 30 > minutes) to build the restore tree. I'm guessing the reason is these > tables: > > -rw-rw---- 1 mysql mysql 7.4G 2011-06-08 13:24 File.MYD > -rw-rw---- 1 mysql mysql 5.1G 2011-06-08 13:24 File.MYI > -rw-rw---- 1 mysql mysql 233M 2011-06-08 13:24 Filename.MYI > -rw-rw---- 1 mysql mysql 161M 2011-06-08 13:24 Filename.MYD > -rw-rw---- 1 mysql mysql 153M 2011-06-08 13:24 Path.MYI > -rw-rw---- 1 mysql mysql 99M 2011-06-08 13:24 Path.MYD > > Addressing this with a move to PostgreSQL has been on my list but I might > try a move to InnoDB first as it's likely much simpler. > > Assuming that version of MySQL, do you know if the case for InnoDB vs > MyISAM is still as cut and dry? Would we likely see substantial > performance improvements? > > Thanks for any help, > > Gavin > Hello,
You will see performance improvements if you have lot of concurrents updates. Which Bacula version do you have ? Perhaps it's an index issue. HTH Jérôme Blion ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ EditLive Enterprise is the world's most technically advanced content authoring tool. Experience the power of Track Changes, Inline Image Editing and ensure content is compliant with Accessibility Checking. http://p.sf.net/sfu/ephox-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
