Re: 2 million row database from hell! help a newbie in over his head.

In article <dj_g7.184416$%a.7737982_at_news1.rdc1.sdca.home.com>, Carl says...

>The post indicated that MySQL was being used. I didn't realize that MySQL
>supports materialized views.
>I don't understand what you mean by "More
>advanced (and more relational) solution would be using index".

Because having explicit redundant data of any kind is not good by relational canons. Seriously, on practice people weight the cost of being complient with a principle versus implications of violating it. Therefore, I wouldn't rush to retire my snapshots and write snapshot indexes instead, yet.

>"Mikito Harakiri" <nospam_at_newsranger.com> wrote in message
>news:wRQg7.10654$2u.76220_at_www.newsranger.com...
>> In article <lcHg7.182793$%a.7691942_at_news1.rdc1.sdca.home.com>, Carl
 says...
>>
>> >If you have a very "popular" query, such as average rainfall for last
 year
>> >per region, create a table for this.
>>
>> If you have a very popular query, such as average rainfall for last year
>> per region, create a materialized view (snapshot) for this. More advanced
 (and
>> more relational) solution would be using index. I'm not sure if built-in
 indexes
>> for "group by" are readily available yet off the shelf, but with extending
>> indexing feature you can certainly program one.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Received on Thu Aug 23 2001 - 05:31:19 CEST