[wp-hackers] Rebuttal (re: Meta tables: Take 5)
mikeschinkel at newclarity.net
Fri Jul 24 15:50:07 UTC 2009
I also agree with Jacob that the performance concern is way overrated.
OTOH, I'm very weary of debating things on this list only to never see
a consensus nor any results so I'd just really be happy to see
*something* done related to meta, because I need it.
WordPress Custom Plugins
On Jul 24, 2009, at 11:38 AM, Jacob Santos wrote:
> I understand your argument that having a single table for meta is an
> entirely bad idea based on the following assumptions.
> 1. Having hundreds of millions of rows is a performance problem for
> searching, insertion, etc.
> 2. Having multiple blogs using the same table is a bad idea because
> the size of the single table increases exponentially.
> 3. It quite frankly just plain sucks and is "bad design."
> Let me refute these claims, and if you have any further ones, then
> let me know as I don't want to put up a straw man. These are just
> the ones that I've heard in the past as to why single table
> solutions are terrible. You might have others.
> 1. With proper indexes, performance problems shouldn't be an issue.
> Having millions of rows in majority of cases shouldn't hinder most
> of the use cases with the correct indexes to search on.
> 2. I would probably state that having multiple meta tables for each
> blog would be a good idea as it doesn't have to be tied to just all
> of the blogs for a single table but for a single blog for MU
> 3. It is in my opinion that having multiple tables with the same
> structure and tiny amount of rows is even worse design than a single
> table. Alas, a compromise can probably be found between a single
> table and multiple tables.
> I will contend that for the majority of non-MU and plain WordPress
> installations, having a single meta meta table will never even get
> close to reaching 100,000 rows, let alone the millions that would be
> required to degrade performance.
> I was actually going to flame you based on my (now correct)
> assumption that it would be creating new tables. I think that it
> would be against my doing so, or at least not publicly (the flame
> email should be arriving to your email soon).
> Jacob Santos
> wp-hackers mailing list
> wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
More information about the wp-hackers