MySQL Bugs: #16463: '14.4 Choosing a Storage Engine' lists InnoDB costs too high, NDB features wrong

Bug #16463	'14.4 Choosing a Storage Engine' lists InnoDB costs too high, NDB features wrong
Submitted:	12 Jan 2006 18:41	Modified:	13 Jan 2006 18:19
Reporter:	Heikki Tuuri	Email Updates:
Status:	Closed	Impact on me:	None
Category:	MySQL Server: Documentation	Severity:	S2 (Serious)
Version:	All	OS:	Any (All)
Assigned to:	Stefan Hinz	CPU Architecture:	Any

Description:
Figure 14.2 at http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/pluggable-storage-choosing.html claims that the storage cost of InnoDB is High, whereas it is Low for NDB and BDB. In reality, NDB requires 3 x data size of storage, and the data size itself is quite big compared to InnoDB. And I am not sure that BDB tables are much smaller than InnoDB tables, either.

The table also lists the memory cost of InnoDB as High, while it is only Medium for 'Memory' tables, and Low for BDB. This is very strange, since Memory tables must reside entirely in memory, while InnoDB can store them on disk! And I am not sure BDB tables are any smaller than InnoDB tables in their memory requirements.

Also, I am not sure that 'Bulk insert speed' in BDB and NDB is High, while it is Low in InnoDB.

Regards,

Heikki

How to repeat:
N/A

Suggested fix:
Mark Storage cost Low for InnoDB, and mark Memory cost Low or Medium.

Other comments:
NDB supports transactions.
NDB does not support MVCC/snapshot reads (does really archive do this??)
Storage cost for NDB can be concidered low...but rather high

Turned the original graphic into a table.
Removed dubious claims about storage cost, memory cost, and bulk insert speed.