[wp-hackers] MySQL: Union vs global table
dino at duechiacchiere.it
Fri Feb 21 00:21:13 UTC 2014
So you're both saying that this would be better than putting all the records in a global table with blog_id?
Yes, people using this have their own server.
Thank you all,
On February 20, 2014 5:43:20 PM EST, Eric Hendrix <hendronix at gmail.com> wrote:
>Agreed, updated as infrequently as daily. Either way your performance
>"millions of rows per blog" will take a serious hit - hope folks
>this are on their own server - not a particularly suitable situation
>VPS or otherwise, right?
>On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 5:36 PM, Chloé Desoutter <
>chloe.desoutter+wphackers at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Dino,
>> Fake a materialized view (by a CREATE OR REPLACE TABLE x AS SELECT)
>> MySQL doesn't support them. Update it on a regular period. This will
>> the less.
>> Yours sincerely
>> 2014-02-20 23:15 GMT+01:00 Dino Termini <dino at duechiacchiere.it>:
>> > Hi list,
>> > I am working on a plugin that stores information in a table. In MU
>> > environments, each blog will have its own instance of that table
>> > wp itself does for posts etc). Now, I am also being asked to
>> > "network view" of that information. I evidently have two choices:
>> > on wp_*_mytable, or use a global table with blog_id. We may be
>> > about millions of rows per blog. So the latter approach would
>> > performance when analyzing the info for a given site (more
>> > assume.
>> > What would you do in this case?
>> > Thanks
>> > Dino
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > wp-hackers mailing list
>> > wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
>> > http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
>> wp-hackers mailing list
>> wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
>*Eric A. Hendrix*
>hendronix at gmail.com
>*"Non Timebo Mala"*
>wp-hackers mailing list
>wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
More information about the wp-hackers