Re: Time to put theory to the test?

On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 09:58:49AM -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> J Sisson <sisson(dot)j(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Rob Wultsch <wultsch(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >> Tip from someone that manages thousands of MySQL servers: Use
> >> InnoDB when using MySQL.
> >
> > Granted, my knowledge of PostgreSQL (and even MSSQL) far surpasses
> > my knowledge of MySQL, but if InnoDB has such amazing benefits as
> > being crash safe, and even speed increases in some instances, why
> > isn't InnoDB default?
>
> Because it's not as fast as the unsafe ISAM implementation for most
> benchmarks.
>
> There is one minor gotcha in InnoDB (unless it's been fixed since
> 2008): the release of locks is not atomic with the persistence of
> the data in the write-ahead log (which makes it S2PL but not SS2PL).
> So it is possible for another connection to see data that won't be
> there after crash recovery. This is justified as an optimization.
> Personally, I would prefer not to see data from other transactions
> until it has actually been successfully committed.
>
> -Kevin
>

In addition, their fulltext indexing only works with MyISAM tables.

Ken