Re: MySQL -- was mysql backup quesiton

["markw-4" <user=5@nabble.blu.org>]

 This is a very important discussion, IMHO so, and I know I'm at least 
partially responsible, lets try to keep it polite. OK? 

> On Sat, 2008-01-05 at 23:43 -0500, Mark Woodward wrote: 
> ... 
>> Like any high performance product, if you never push it or never compare 
>> it, you won't notice the difference. A Porsche doesn't feel much 
>> different than a Volkswagen sitting in a garage. 
>> 
>> MySQL does not support SQL well enough to create really efficient 
>> queries. MySQL's query analyzer does not do a very good job at mapping a 
>> query to an access plan. When the amount of data you wish to access is 
>> negligible these things are also negligible.  When the amount of data is 
>> non-trivial, MySQL is catastrophic. 
>> 
>> After that, MySQL's performance in a high volume site is abysmal. As 
>> long as it is read-only, you are fine. If you start adding table 
>> updates, inserts, or deletes MySQL's performance profile crumbles. Why 
>> do you think you see so many "Can't access database" messages from MySQL 
>> sites that have been slashdotted? 
> 
> It never cease to amaze me about the bad claims of MySQL performance. I 
> work at a company that typically has 30,000 - 50,000 simultaneous users 
> on their site in a social network setting. High reads, high writes, on 
> MySQL 4.x. Performance is great.