![mysql vs mysql enterprise mysql vs mysql enterprise](https://images.slideplayer.com/23/6557198/slides/slide_11.jpg)
Here are a few kinds of websites in which we’ve seen performance gains. Should you replace MySQL with Percona?Īs a rule of thumb, if you constantly experience performance or stability issues with MySQL, your site might perform better with Percona.
#Mysql vs mysql enterprise code
This helps avoid database splitting, and associated code rewrite. In contrast, Percona keeps part of the data on disk, thereby minimizing server memory usage. Such splitting (aka sharding) requires extensive re-write of application code to correctly route database queries. When the practical memory limit is exhausted, many websites split the database into multiple servers to avoid memory bottlenecks.
![mysql vs mysql enterprise mysql vs mysql enterprise](https://kinsta.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/MySQL-relational-database-model.png)
When the database is large, MySQL needs proportionately large memory to function well. MySQL relies only on server memory to execute queries. When these sites grow, their databases can become quite large (50 GB or more). Many websites such as eCommerce stores, market analytics apps, online publishers, etc. MySQL doesn’t scale without sharding – Percona helps avoid sharding So, when a performance issue is noticed, the erring query, table, user or visitor can be quickly identified with a few queries on this table. Percona records performance statistics on a table called INFORMATION_SCHEMA. These tools do not provide historic performance data, and a lot of time is lost waiting for a performance bottleneck to crop up again. To troubleshoot these issues, many external tools such as mytop, mysqladmin, etc. that can cause MySQL to become slow, or even crash. There are many reasons such as slow queries, unoptimized tables, etc. Percona has diagnostics metrics for fast troubleshooting Here, it supports binary log group commit feature too. Unlike MyISAM engine, things become really different when MySQL uses InnoDB. Taken together, these two features allow fast execution of database transactions in multi-user environments. Further, it uses a technology called “Binary log Group commit” where multiple transactions can be written at the same time. Percona avoid this issue by locking only a single row (aka fine-grained locking) when executing queries. This leads to other queries waiting in a queue for the lock to be released, and causes significant delays when the query volume is high. When MySQL uses MyISAM storage engine and executes a query, it locks all the tables needed by that query, so that data is not modified by other queries. Percona executes queries in parallel – MySQL doesn’t This reduces the overall memory usage, which translates to lower I/O bottlenecks, and lower instances of high server load. Percona, on the other hand use something called “Dynamic row format”, where data fields are given just enough memory they need. With high memory usage, more disk-based swap is used, leading to high I/O wait. As the queries on a database increase, the required memory increases. Even for small data size, MySQL assigns a fixed storage size for memory. The reason for this lies in the way MySQL stores data. MySQL with MyISAM engine can be a memory hog. MySQL needs a lot of memory – Percona doesn’t Here are the top reasons why we used Percona in those servers. We support several websites and web hosting providers on whose systems we’ve replaced MySQL with Percona. Percona server started gaining popularity in 2013, as a high performance, high availability alternative to MySQL that has features comparable to the MySQL Enterprise version. Today, we’ll see how Percona differs from MySQL, and if you should choose Percona for your website. However, MySQL servers often face performance issues, leading to many websites looking for alternate high performance databases. It is supported by all hosting providers, is easy to administer, and free. Almost every open source project uses MySQL as its database.