Why are you using a heap table? My company has tables with much more information than that, that get updated much more frequently. We use InnoDB tables, with very large buffer sizes and have tweaked which queries use the cache and which don't, on a system with lots of RAM (10Gb). Basically we've set it up so everything is in memory anyway.
Perhaps a similar setup would help for you? Sincerely, Sheeri Kritzer On 1/27/06, Jan Kirchhoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > Did anybody ever benchmark heap-tables against a cluster? > I have a table with 900.000 rows (40 fields, CHARs, INTs and DOUBLEs, > Avg_row_length=294) that gets around 600 updates/sec (grouped in about 12 > extended inserts a minute inserting/updating 3000 rows each). > This is currently a HEAP-table (and get replicated onto a slave, too). I > experience locking-problems on both the master and the slave, queries that > usually respond within 0.0x seconds suddenly hang and take 10 seconds or > sometimes even longer. > I wonder if a cluster setup would give me any speedup in this issue? I will > be doing some benchmarking myself next week, but It would be very helpful if > anybody could share experiences with me so I don't have to start from > scratch... It is difficult and very time-consuming to set up a test-suite > comparable to our production systems... Any tips will help! Thanks! > > regards > Jan > > -- > MySQL General Mailing List > For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql > To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
