Comments on: Large result sets vs. compression protocol http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2007/12/20/large-result-sets-vs-compression-protocol/ Everything about MySQL Performance Sat, 07 Nov 2009 18:35:44 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: pabloj http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2007/12/20/large-result-sets-vs-compression-protocol/comment-page-1/#comment-221733 pabloj Fri, 21 Dec 2007 17:21:55 +0000 http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2007/12/20/large-result-sets-vs-compression-protocol/#comment-221733 That's why I ranted about this missing feature in Firebird ;-) That’s why I ranted about this missing feature in Firebird ;-)

]]> By: Kevin Burton http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2007/12/20/large-result-sets-vs-compression-protocol/comment-page-1/#comment-221467 Kevin Burton Fri, 21 Dec 2007 04:25:35 +0000 http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2007/12/20/large-result-sets-vs-compression-protocol/#comment-221467 Yes.... of course if you're doing this on 100Mbit it will be faster. Do it on 1-10Gbe and it won't be any faster. It's a shame that it's taking most shared hosting providers until 2007 to really start offering Gbe Yes…. of course if you’re doing this on 100Mbit it will be faster.

Do it on 1-10Gbe and it won’t be any faster.

It’s a shame that it’s taking most shared hosting providers until 2007 to really start offering Gbe

]]> By: gigiduru http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2007/12/20/large-result-sets-vs-compression-protocol/comment-page-1/#comment-221289 gigiduru Thu, 20 Dec 2007 21:14:29 +0000 http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2007/12/20/large-result-sets-vs-compression-protocol/#comment-221289 That's why stored procedures and cursors were invented. And I'm not talking about MySQL's flat text stored procedures but about real compiled SP. That’s why stored procedures and cursors were invented. And I’m not talking about MySQL’s flat text stored procedures but about real compiled SP.

]]> By: shodan http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2007/12/20/large-result-sets-vs-compression-protocol/comment-page-1/#comment-221038 shodan Thu, 20 Dec 2007 10:41:39 +0000 http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2007/12/20/large-result-sets-vs-compression-protocol/#comment-221038 Pavel, well, there are different cases. Smaller DCs and/or office LANs could still offer 100 Mbit links; or the link could be 1 Gbit but busy with other stuff. <i>Sometimes</i> compression could help; that's the whole point. Pavel,
well, there are different cases. Smaller DCs and/or office LANs could still offer 100 Mbit links; or the link could be 1 Gbit but busy with other stuff. Sometimes compression could help; that’s the whole point.

]]> By: Pavel Francirek http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2007/12/20/large-result-sets-vs-compression-protocol/comment-page-1/#comment-221037 Pavel Francirek Thu, 20 Dec 2007 10:38:10 +0000 http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2007/12/20/large-result-sets-vs-compression-protocol/#comment-221037 sorry: "or you will loose" sorry: “or you will loose”

]]> By: Pavel Francirek http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2007/12/20/large-result-sets-vs-compression-protocol/comment-page-1/#comment-221035 Pavel Francirek Thu, 20 Dec 2007 10:35:47 +0000 http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2007/12/20/large-result-sets-vs-compression-protocol/#comment-221035 So the the right result is: If your are working with large data sets use 1Gbit (or better) link or use will loose significant (at least 20%) part of performace :) (I don't understand why to use just 100Mbit link between database and client). So the the right result is: If your are working with large data sets use 1Gbit (or better) link or use will loose significant (at least 20%) part of performace :) (I don’t understand why to use just 100Mbit link between database and client).

]]>