From: Arnaud F. <ar...@cr...> - 2005-01-08 13:12:53
|
Manuel VACELET a écrit : > Reini Urban wrote: > >> I'll have a look after 1.3.11 but I still see no technical reason, why >> this should be better than tablename prefixes. Merging all the >> seperate table sets into one big mess... > > > I agree, it's not technical reasons. > I just "fell" it not very elegant (tables multiplications). Well ... your sql server will try to load the full table in memory. If it's too big, it won't be able to. With more smaller tables, that means more "context switching" ... but more chance to have the "current" table fully loaded in memory ... On a single very big table for your wiki farm, you'll also have bigger indexes to load, etc, etc ... that means slower operations. You should benchmark the two solutions with some real life data ... -- Arnaud Fontaine CRAO Jabber: sh...@ra... |