On 06 Apr 2006 18:12:59 -0700, Randal L. Schwartz <merlyn@stonehenge.com> wrote: > Given the cost of programmer time (and the cost of lost data) vs the > cost of a slightly faster processor, is it ever really worth it even > if MySQL is *twice* as fast?
Yes. Example 1: I feel like digging through some data that will be relevant for a short time, and a mysql database is the quickest/easiest way for to slurp stuff out and get answers. I sat in on a netflow tutorial last year at cansecwest. We were given a hundred megs of flows and told to find the problems. A minute later, I had a reasonable table put together, populated with data and was getting answers back. Example 2: I have other mysql databases where I store syslog for later analysis. Sure, I have all the original logs on disk, but it's faster to knock something together with mysql knowing that I can reconstitute the database easily from the original data. My problem lies with syslog not always getting the data back to my log server, not with mysql sometimes losing it. CK -- GDB has a 'break' feature; why doesn't it have 'fix' too?
