![]() |
Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
If you are talking that much, I might consider another DB. MySQL is great, but there are reasons for the various DB engines, and even a moderate volume like you are talking could stress MySQL. But hey, give it a shot in a test environment. If it holds up for you, go for it! ----- Original Message ----- From: <FRamsay at castelhq.com> To: <discuss at blu.org> Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2003 4:18 PM Subject: mysql and volume > > Ok, how well does mysql handle very high volume... say 200,000+ > transactions per hour. > The configuration would be very simple, one server one db, no backup server > (fault recovery would be a reset of the DB). > And the transactions would mostly be updates and selects. > > > -fjr > > > Frank Ramsay > Systems Programmer > Castel, Inc > 100 Cummings Center > Suite 157h > Beverly, MA 01915 > (978) 236 1000 (voice) > (978) 236 1197 (fax) > Email: framsay at castelhq.com > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > Discuss at blu.org > http://www.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >
![]() |
|
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |