News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Drizzle7, a Rackspace backed MySQL fork - The icing on the cake.

Re:Drizzle7, a Rackspace backed MySQL fork - The icing on th... by dmethvin on Wednesday March 16, 2011 @10:53AM (#2332245)
What is the advantage of dropping the smaller integer types? Does it reduce the per-record overhead for example? I have worked with a table that had about 200 million rows and 4 1-byte tinyint values. If those had to be full 4-byte ints it would require another 2GB to store and reduce the number of records that could fit in memory. Unless there is savings elsewhere?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Drizzle7, a Rackspace backed MySQL fork - The icing on th... by ldng on Wednesday March 16, 2011 @12:15PM (#2332617)
I think the point was to trim down the beast. For that you need tradeoff some features I guess. So small int were cut off. As were triggers, views and stored proc. Most of which is hardly used by target audience, webdev that is.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Drizzle7, a Rackspace backed MySQL fork - The icing on th... by LinuxJedi on Wednesday March 16, 2011 @12:17PM (#2332624)
There are plans to bring back at least stored procs very soon. But to do them properly and as a plugin type (so if you don't need them they aren't there)
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Drizzle7, a Rackspace backed MySQL fork - The icing on th... by LinuxJedi on Wednesday March 16, 2011 @12:00PM (#2332536)
With InnoDB I believe that it stores the smaller int types as 4 byte anyway. But I am not an expert on this particular section code.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Drizzle7, a Rackspace backed MySQL fork - The icing on th... by jswinghammer on Wednesday March 16, 2011 @11:27AM (#2332382)
In theory you could pack the values in yourself into the larger columns.
[ Parent | on HN ]