对于这样的读写比率，我猜InnoDB会表现得更好。 既然您可以接受脏读，那么您可以(如果您负担得起)复制到一个从服务器，并让您的所有读都到从服务器。另外，考虑批量插入，而不是一次插入一条记录。

如果使用MyISAM，则每小时不会执行任何事务，除非将每个DML语句视为一个事务(在任何情况下，在崩溃时都不是持久的或原子的)。

因此我认为你必须使用InnoDB。

每秒300个交易听起来很多。如果您绝对需要这些事务在电源故障时保持持久，请确保您的I/O子系统能够轻松地处理每秒这么多的写操作。您至少需要一个带有电池缓存的RAID控制器。

如果你可以降低一点持久性，你可以使用InnoDB，将innodb_flush_log_at_trx_commit设置为0或2(参见文档)，你可以提高性能。

有许多补丁可以从谷歌和其他补丁中提高并发性——如果没有它们仍然不能获得足够的性能，这些补丁可能会引起您的兴趣。

我曾经在一个使用MySQL的大容量系统上工作过，我也尝试过MyISAM和InnoDB。

我发现MyISAM中的表级锁定对我们的工作负载造成了严重的性能问题，这听起来与您的工作负载类似。不幸的是，我还发现在InnoDB下的性能也比我希望的要差。

最后，我通过分割数据解决了争用问题，这样插入就进入了一个“热”表，而选择从不查询热表。

这也允许删除(数据是时间敏感的，我们只保留X天的价值)发生在“陈旧”的表上，这些表同样不会被选择查询触及。InnoDB在批量删除方面的性能似乎很差，所以如果你打算清除数据，你可能想要以这样一种方式来构造它，即旧数据在一个陈旧的表中，可以简单地删除而不是对其进行删除。

当然，我不知道你的应用程序是什么，但希望这能让你对MyISAM和InnoDB的一些问题有一些了解。

为了增加广泛的选择，这里涵盖了两个发动机之间的机械差异，我提出了一个经验速度比较研究。

就纯粹的速度而言，MyISAM并不总是比InnoDB快，但根据我的经验，在pure READ工作环境中，MyISAM往往快2.0-2.5倍。显然，这并不适用于所有环境——正如其他人所写的那样，MyISAM缺少事务和外键之类的东西。

我在下面做了一些基准测试——我使用python进行循环，使用timeit库进行时间比较。出于兴趣，我还包括了内存引擎，这提供了最好的性能，尽管它只适用于较小的表(当您超过MySQL内存限制时，您会不断遇到表'tbl'已满)。我研究的四种选择类型是:

香草选择 计数 有条件的选择 索引和非索引子选择

首先，我使用以下SQL创建了三个表

CREATE TABLE
    data_interrogation.test_table_myisam
    (
        index_col BIGINT NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
        value1 DOUBLE,
        value2 DOUBLE,
        value3 DOUBLE,
        value4 DOUBLE,
        PRIMARY KEY (index_col)
    )
    ENGINE=MyISAM DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8

在第二和第三个表中用“MyISAM”替换“InnoDB”和“memory”。

 

1)香草选择

查询:SELECT * FROM tbl WHERE index_col = xx

结果:画

它们的速度基本上是相同的，并且正如预期的那样，与要选择的列数成线性关系。InnoDB似乎比MyISAM快一点，但这真的是微不足道的。

代码:

import timeit
import MySQLdb
import MySQLdb.cursors
import random
from random import randint

db = MySQLdb.connect(host="...", user="...", passwd="...", db="...", cursorclass=MySQLdb.cursors.DictCursor)
cur = db.cursor()

lengthOfTable = 100000

# Fill up the tables with random data
for x in xrange(lengthOfTable):
    rand1 = random.random()
    rand2 = random.random()
    rand3 = random.random()
    rand4 = random.random()

    insertString = "INSERT INTO test_table_innodb (value1,value2,value3,value4) VALUES (" + str(rand1) + "," + str(rand2) + "," + str(rand3) + "," + str(rand4) + ")"
    insertString2 = "INSERT INTO test_table_myisam (value1,value2,value3,value4) VALUES (" + str(rand1) + "," + str(rand2) + "," + str(rand3) + "," + str(rand4) + ")"
    insertString3 = "INSERT INTO test_table_memory (value1,value2,value3,value4) VALUES (" + str(rand1) + "," + str(rand2) + "," + str(rand3) + "," + str(rand4) + ")"

    cur.execute(insertString)
    cur.execute(insertString2)
    cur.execute(insertString3)

db.commit()

# Define a function to pull a certain number of records from these tables
def selectRandomRecords(testTable,numberOfRecords):

    for x in xrange(numberOfRecords):
        rand1 = randint(0,lengthOfTable)

        selectString = "SELECT * FROM " + testTable + " WHERE index_col = " + str(rand1)
        cur.execute(selectString)

setupString = "from __main__ import selectRandomRecords"

# Test time taken using timeit
myisam_times = []
innodb_times = []
memory_times = []

for theLength in [3,10,30,100,300,1000,3000,10000]:

    innodb_times.append( timeit.timeit('selectRandomRecords("test_table_innodb",' + str(theLength) + ')', number=100, setup=setupString) )
    myisam_times.append( timeit.timeit('selectRandomRecords("test_table_myisam",' + str(theLength) + ')', number=100, setup=setupString) )
    memory_times.append( timeit.timeit('selectRandomRecords("test_table_memory",' + str(theLength) + ')', number=100, setup=setupString) )

 

2)计算

查询:SELECT count(*) FROM tbl

结果:MyISAM获胜

这个说明了MyISAM和InnoDB之间的一个很大的不同——MyISAM(和内存)跟踪表中的记录数量，所以这个事务是快速的，O(1)。在我调查的范围内，InnoDB计数所需的时间随着表的大小超线性增加。我怀疑在实践中观察到的许多MyISAM查询的加速都是由于类似的效果。

代码:

myisam_times = []
innodb_times = []
memory_times = []

# Define a function to count the records
def countRecords(testTable):

    selectString = "SELECT count(*) FROM " + testTable
    cur.execute(selectString)

setupString = "from __main__ import countRecords"

# Truncate the tables and re-fill with a set amount of data
for theLength in [3,10,30,100,300,1000,3000,10000,30000,100000]:

    truncateString = "TRUNCATE test_table_innodb"
    truncateString2 = "TRUNCATE test_table_myisam"
    truncateString3 = "TRUNCATE test_table_memory"

    cur.execute(truncateString)
    cur.execute(truncateString2)
    cur.execute(truncateString3)

    for x in xrange(theLength):
        rand1 = random.random()
        rand2 = random.random()
        rand3 = random.random()
        rand4 = random.random()

        insertString = "INSERT INTO test_table_innodb (value1,value2,value3,value4) VALUES (" + str(rand1) + "," + str(rand2) + "," + str(rand3) + "," + str(rand4) + ")"
        insertString2 = "INSERT INTO test_table_myisam (value1,value2,value3,value4) VALUES (" + str(rand1) + "," + str(rand2) + "," + str(rand3) + "," + str(rand4) + ")"
        insertString3 = "INSERT INTO test_table_memory (value1,value2,value3,value4) VALUES (" + str(rand1) + "," + str(rand2) + "," + str(rand3) + "," + str(rand4) + ")"

        cur.execute(insertString)
        cur.execute(insertString2)
        cur.execute(insertString3)

    db.commit()

    # Count and time the query
    innodb_times.append( timeit.timeit('countRecords("test_table_innodb")', number=100, setup=setupString) )
    myisam_times.append( timeit.timeit('countRecords("test_table_myisam")', number=100, setup=setupString) )
    memory_times.append( timeit.timeit('countRecords("test_table_memory")', number=100, setup=setupString) )

 

3)有条件选择

查询:SELECT * FROM tbl WHERE value1<0.5 AND value2<0.5 AND value3<0.5 AND value4<0.5

结果:MyISAM获胜

在这里，MyISAM和内存的性能大致相同，对于更大的表，它比InnoDB高出50%左右。在这类查询中，MyISAM的好处似乎得到了最大化。

代码:

myisam_times = []
innodb_times = []
memory_times = []

# Define a function to perform conditional selects
def conditionalSelect(testTable):
    selectString = "SELECT * FROM " + testTable + " WHERE value1 < 0.5 AND value2 < 0.5 AND value3 < 0.5 AND value4 < 0.5"
    cur.execute(selectString)

setupString = "from __main__ import conditionalSelect"

# Truncate the tables and re-fill with a set amount of data
for theLength in [3,10,30,100,300,1000,3000,10000,30000,100000]:

    truncateString = "TRUNCATE test_table_innodb"
    truncateString2 = "TRUNCATE test_table_myisam"
    truncateString3 = "TRUNCATE test_table_memory"

    cur.execute(truncateString)
    cur.execute(truncateString2)
    cur.execute(truncateString3)

    for x in xrange(theLength):
        rand1 = random.random()
        rand2 = random.random()
        rand3 = random.random()
        rand4 = random.random()

        insertString = "INSERT INTO test_table_innodb (value1,value2,value3,value4) VALUES (" + str(rand1) + "," + str(rand2) + "," + str(rand3) + "," + str(rand4) + ")"
        insertString2 = "INSERT INTO test_table_myisam (value1,value2,value3,value4) VALUES (" + str(rand1) + "," + str(rand2) + "," + str(rand3) + "," + str(rand4) + ")"
        insertString3 = "INSERT INTO test_table_memory (value1,value2,value3,value4) VALUES (" + str(rand1) + "," + str(rand2) + "," + str(rand3) + "," + str(rand4) + ")"

        cur.execute(insertString)
        cur.execute(insertString2)
        cur.execute(insertString3)

    db.commit()

    # Count and time the query
    innodb_times.append( timeit.timeit('conditionalSelect("test_table_innodb")', number=100, setup=setupString) )
    myisam_times.append( timeit.timeit('conditionalSelect("test_table_myisam")', number=100, setup=setupString) )
    memory_times.append( timeit.timeit('conditionalSelect("test_table_memory")', number=100, setup=setupString) )

 

4)子

结果:InnoDB胜出

对于这个查询，我为子选择创建了一组额外的表。每个都是简单的两列bigint，一列有主键索引，另一列没有任何索引。由于表的大小很大，我没有测试内存引擎。SQL表创建命令为

CREATE TABLE
    subselect_myisam
    (
        index_col bigint NOT NULL,
        non_index_col bigint,
        PRIMARY KEY (index_col)
    )
    ENGINE=MyISAM DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8;

在第二个表中，'MyISAM'再次替换'InnoDB'。

在这个查询中，我将选择表的大小保留为1000000，而是改变子选择列的大小。

在这一点上，InnoDB很容易获胜。在我们得到一个合理的大小表后，两个引擎都线性缩放子选择的大小。索引加快了MyISAM命令的速度，但有趣的是，它对InnoDB的速度几乎没有影响。 subSelect.png

代码:

myisam_times = []
innodb_times = []
myisam_times_2 = []
innodb_times_2 = []

def subSelectRecordsIndexed(testTable,testSubSelect):
    selectString = "SELECT * FROM " + testTable + " WHERE index_col in ( SELECT index_col FROM " + testSubSelect + " )"
    cur.execute(selectString)

setupString = "from __main__ import subSelectRecordsIndexed"

def subSelectRecordsNotIndexed(testTable,testSubSelect):
    selectString = "SELECT * FROM " + testTable + " WHERE index_col in ( SELECT non_index_col FROM " + testSubSelect + " )"
    cur.execute(selectString)

setupString2 = "from __main__ import subSelectRecordsNotIndexed"

# Truncate the old tables, and re-fill with 1000000 records
truncateString = "TRUNCATE test_table_innodb"
truncateString2 = "TRUNCATE test_table_myisam"

cur.execute(truncateString)
cur.execute(truncateString2)

lengthOfTable = 1000000

# Fill up the tables with random data
for x in xrange(lengthOfTable):
    rand1 = random.random()
    rand2 = random.random()
    rand3 = random.random()
    rand4 = random.random()

    insertString = "INSERT INTO test_table_innodb (value1,value2,value3,value4) VALUES (" + str(rand1) + "," + str(rand2) + "," + str(rand3) + "," + str(rand4) + ")"
    insertString2 = "INSERT INTO test_table_myisam (value1,value2,value3,value4) VALUES (" + str(rand1) + "," + str(rand2) + "," + str(rand3) + "," + str(rand4) + ")"

    cur.execute(insertString)
    cur.execute(insertString2)

for theLength in [3,10,30,100,300,1000,3000,10000,30000,100000]:

    truncateString = "TRUNCATE subselect_innodb"
    truncateString2 = "TRUNCATE subselect_myisam"

    cur.execute(truncateString)
    cur.execute(truncateString2)

    # For each length, empty the table and re-fill it with random data
    rand_sample = sorted(random.sample(xrange(lengthOfTable), theLength))
    rand_sample_2 = random.sample(xrange(lengthOfTable), theLength)

    for (the_value_1,the_value_2) in zip(rand_sample,rand_sample_2):
        insertString = "INSERT INTO subselect_innodb (index_col,non_index_col) VALUES (" + str(the_value_1) + "," + str(the_value_2) + ")"
        insertString2 = "INSERT INTO subselect_myisam (index_col,non_index_col) VALUES (" + str(the_value_1) + "," + str(the_value_2) + ")"

        cur.execute(insertString)
        cur.execute(insertString2)

    db.commit()

    # Finally, time the queries
    innodb_times.append( timeit.timeit('subSelectRecordsIndexed("test_table_innodb","subselect_innodb")', number=100, setup=setupString) )
    myisam_times.append( timeit.timeit('subSelectRecordsIndexed("test_table_myisam","subselect_myisam")', number=100, setup=setupString) )
        
    innodb_times_2.append( timeit.timeit('subSelectRecordsNotIndexed("test_table_innodb","subselect_innodb")', number=100, setup=setupString2) )
    myisam_times_2.append( timeit.timeit('subSelectRecordsNotIndexed("test_table_myisam","subselect_myisam")', number=100, setup=setupString2) )

我认为所有这些的关键信息是，如果你真的关心速度，你需要对你正在执行的查询进行基准测试，而不是假设哪个引擎更适合。

有点偏离主题，但为了文档的目的和完整性，我想添加以下内容。

一般来说，使用InnoDB会使应用程序变得不那么复杂，可能也更没有bug。因为可以将所有引用完整性(外键约束)放入数据模型中，所以不需要像使用MyISAM时那样多的应用程序代码。

Every time you insert, delete or replace a record, you will HAVE to check and maintain the relationships. E.g. if you delete a parent, all children should be deleted too. For instance, even in a simple blogging system, if you delete a blogposting record, you will have to delete the comment records, the likes, etc. In InnoDB this is done automatically by the database engine (if you specified the contraints in the model) and requires no application code. In MyISAM this will have to be coded into the application, which is very difficult in web-servers. Web-servers are by nature very concurrent / parallel and because these actions should be atomical and MyISAM supports no real transactions, using MyISAM for web-servers is risky / error-prone.

而且在大多数情况下，InnoDB会表现得更好，原因有很多，其中一个原因是它能够使用记录级锁而不是表级锁。不仅在写比读更频繁的情况下，在大型数据集上有复杂连接的情况下也是如此。我们注意到，对于非常大的连接(需要几分钟)，使用InnoDB表比MyISAM表性能提高了3倍。

我想说的是，在使用MySQL时，InnoDB(使用3NF数据模型，具有引用完整性)应该是默认的选择。MyISAM只能在非常具体的情况下使用。它很可能会执行更少，导致应用程序更大，bug更多。

话虽如此。数据模型是一门很少在网页设计师/程序员中发现的艺术。无意冒犯，但这确实解释了MyISAM被如此广泛使用的原因。

myisam对于这种类型的工作负载(高并发写入)是一个NOGO，我对innodb没有那么多的经验(测试了3次，发现每次性能都很糟糕，但自从上次测试以来已经有一段时间了) 如果你没有被强迫运行mysql，可以考虑尝试postgres，因为它处理并发写要更好