Re: [Sqlgrey-users] Performance: strict versus loose expiration time

[Dan F. <da...@ha...>]

Michael Storz wrote:

> db_cleandelay seconds longer than the strict one. Taking the default this
> means it is just half an hour longer, which is at least not noticeable for
> the AWLs.
>
>   
Well. We cant really assume what ppl use for db_cleandelay.. I use 60 
seconds. Someone might do it once every week. You never know ;).

> In the next step this select statement will hit the
> query cache as long as the table involved hasn't changed. This could give
> us a second gain especially for the tables from_awl or domain_awl which do
> not change often.
>   
You mean the query-cache like the one build into newer MySql's?
I dont know excactly how thoose work, but why should there be any 
difference when the actual where statement doenst change. I dont see 
anywhere that ie. a timestamp is stuck into the statement. Its all 
static information and thus, in my head, should still hit the query cache.

Most select needs a WHERE statment. Eg. WHERE sender_name =, WHERE src 
=, ect.ect. So i dont see how adding the max_connect_age, 
reconnect_delay or awl_age values (which is static) will change how the 
cache works.


- Dan

ps. Based on this, are you saying i shouldnt apply the "is_active" patch 
you made?