[rt-users] Sessions Table is MyISAM

[Micah Gersten]

On 11/29/2010 07:22 PM, Ruslan Zakirov wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 4:00 AM, Micah Gersten <micah at onshore.com> wrote:
>> On 09/22/2009 08:05 AM, Jesse Vincent wrote:
>>> On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 07:15:09PM -0700, Behzad Mahini wrote:
>>>> I have done a fresh installation of RT 3.8.4,  and have done no
>>>> modifications of any sort to the default installation.....and was
>>>> preparing to do my database backup (using mysqldump),and noticed the
>>>> only table that has a MyISAM engine is the 'Sessions' Table (the rest
>>>> are all InnoDB as expected).
>>>>
>>>> My understanding is that all of these tables were to have been of the
>>>> InnoDB engine type (RT's transaction-based requirements/
>>>> recommendations).
>>>>
>>>> 1) Is this by design, or due to an unresolved bug?
>>> Closer to the former than the latter.
>>>
>> What are the benefits of the Sessions table being MyISAM now that InnoDB
>> read/write throughput is in most cases superior to MyISAM?
> No reason for a long time. Except converting needs upgrade script to
> handle existing instances. Also, it's not trivial to measure real RT
> oriented performance impact to force development. Simulating spherical
> horses in vacuum is not enough for motivation :)
>
So, it could break future upgrades then?