TokoDB is worth a shot certainly if your working set is disk bound. Partitioning might also be an option for you.
From: Maria-discuss [mailto:maria-discuss-bounces+rhys.campbell=tradingscreen....@lists.launchpad.net] On Behalf Of Roberto Spadim Sent: 13 May 2015 17:39 To: Maria Discuss Subject: [Maria-discuss] doubt about best engine hi guys, i'm with doubt about the "best" engine (best = no INSERT lag ~0.100s or less, good SELECT speed ~ 1 to 10 seconds is ok) i have two tables, they only "receive" INSERT and SELECT queries (no DELETE/UPDATE/ALTER) they increase 200MB/day and 3.000.000 rows/day my doubt is, how to have small database size and good read rate? it have ~ 104 inserts / second, but each insert is multi values like ... INSERT INTO table VALUES (),(),(),(),(),() .... in other words... today i'm using aria (it's crash safe) and i don't have problems with concurrent insert / table locks etc, my doubt is about table size and read speed with bigger database i'm considering using spider engine or any other shard system with >100GB , or maybe a big raid-6 system, server is a xeon 8core with 16GB and 2hd 500GB RAID1 SAS (>180MB/s) the client side is a C++ program that i don't have access to change and recompile it, in other words i can only change server side and load balance data table is something like: (datetime decimal(22,6),value decimal(22,6)) the SELECT code use most part of recent data ~5 DAYS, in outlier queries something near to ~1 MONTH ago ideas are wellcome -- Roberto Spadim
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~maria-discuss Post to : maria-discuss@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~maria-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
