<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Call for opinions: Do we need MySQL 5.0 with MySQL 5.4 performance</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2009/04/29/call-for-opinions-do-we-need-mysql-50-with-mysql-54-performance/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2009/04/29/call-for-opinions-do-we-need-mysql-50-with-mysql-54-performance/</link>
	<description>Everything about MySQL Performance</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 05:23:57 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Fuji</title>
		<link>http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2009/04/29/call-for-opinions-do-we-need-mysql-50-with-mysql-54-performance/comment-page-1/#comment-597379</link>
		<dc:creator>Fuji</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Jun 2009 08:27:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/?p=674#comment-597379</guid>
		<description>Here I was excited to move to either InnoDB Plugin or XtraDB... BUT cPanel does not support MySQL 5.1 yet so basically have to wait until they get around to supporting MySQL 5.1  (not savvy enough to manually upgrade mysql and deal with cPanel breakages). Then can try out XtraDB or InnoDB Plugin</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here I was excited to move to either InnoDB Plugin or XtraDB&#8230; BUT cPanel does not support MySQL 5.1 yet so basically have to wait until they get around to supporting MySQL 5.1  (not savvy enough to manually upgrade mysql and deal with cPanel breakages). Then can try out XtraDB or InnoDB Plugin</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charity Majors</title>
		<link>http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2009/04/29/call-for-opinions-do-we-need-mysql-50-with-mysql-54-performance/comment-page-1/#comment-573468</link>
		<dc:creator>Charity Majors</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 19:57:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/?p=674#comment-573468</guid>
		<description>Yes, please!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, please!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark</title>
		<link>http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2009/04/29/call-for-opinions-do-we-need-mysql-50-with-mysql-54-performance/comment-page-1/#comment-559722</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 May 2009 03:37:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/?p=674#comment-559722</guid>
		<description>Add my vote for back-porting! I haven&#039;t had the time to test 5.1 enough to roll it out yet. I&#039;ve used the 5.0.67 and 5.0.75 Percona builds, and they offer some real improvements over the vanilla build in our environment.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Add my vote for back-porting! I haven&#8217;t had the time to test 5.1 enough to roll it out yet. I&#8217;ve used the 5.0.67 and 5.0.75 Percona builds, and they offer some real improvements over the vanilla build in our environment.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bryan</title>
		<link>http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2009/04/29/call-for-opinions-do-we-need-mysql-50-with-mysql-54-performance/comment-page-1/#comment-557908</link>
		<dc:creator>Bryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 May 2009 20:22:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/?p=674#comment-557908</guid>
		<description>I&#039;d love to see the patches backported, also.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;d love to see the patches backported, also.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: peter</title>
		<link>http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2009/04/29/call-for-opinions-do-we-need-mysql-50-with-mysql-54-performance/comment-page-1/#comment-553690</link>
		<dc:creator>peter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 May 2009 02:30:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/?p=674#comment-553690</guid>
		<description>Sheeri,

People are often scared about freshness of the patches without getting into specifics.  A lot of these performance optimization changes are rather local and so safe.  It is like ant and elephant in comparison if you look at MySQL 5.1 or MySQL 5.4 changes.     XtraDB is a more tricky beast mainly because it is based on Innodb plugin which is in active development itself.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sheeri,</p>
<p>People are often scared about freshness of the patches without getting into specifics.  A lot of these performance optimization changes are rather local and so safe.  It is like ant and elephant in comparison if you look at MySQL 5.1 or MySQL 5.4 changes.     XtraDB is a more tricky beast mainly because it is based on Innodb plugin which is in active development itself.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sheeri K. Cabral</title>
		<link>http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2009/04/29/call-for-opinions-do-we-need-mysql-50-with-mysql-54-performance/comment-page-1/#comment-553367</link>
		<dc:creator>Sheeri K. Cabral</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 May 2009 19:27:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/?p=674#comment-553367</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve seen people willing to upgrade to 5.1 (whether on their own or after someone recommends it).

I&#039;ve also seen people willing to use XtraDB.

I&#039;m now seeing people willing to try out 5.4.

5.4 and XtraDB are both alpha products.

I don&#039;t see people who would be on the cutting edge with 5.4 or XtraDB, but are currently on 5.0.  Especially since for many, 5.1 has given a performance improvement.  So in addition to not seeing a desire (other than the one commenter above -- nobody I&#039;ve talked to has expressed this as an interest), I can&#039;t imagine someone would want alpha patches on 5.0....anyone willing to take that risk should be willing to risk trying 5.1.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve seen people willing to upgrade to 5.1 (whether on their own or after someone recommends it).</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve also seen people willing to use XtraDB.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m now seeing people willing to try out 5.4.</p>
<p>5.4 and XtraDB are both alpha products.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t see people who would be on the cutting edge with 5.4 or XtraDB, but are currently on 5.0.  Especially since for many, 5.1 has given a performance improvement.  So in addition to not seeing a desire (other than the one commenter above &#8212; nobody I&#8217;ve talked to has expressed this as an interest), I can&#8217;t imagine someone would want alpha patches on 5.0&#8230;.anyone willing to take that risk should be willing to risk trying 5.1.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter Radavich</title>
		<link>http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2009/04/29/call-for-opinions-do-we-need-mysql-50-with-mysql-54-performance/comment-page-1/#comment-553094</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter Radavich</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 May 2009 08:55:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/?p=674#comment-553094</guid>
		<description>I&#039;d love to see some of these patches backported.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;d love to see some of these patches backported.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Roland Bouman</title>
		<link>http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2009/04/29/call-for-opinions-do-we-need-mysql-50-with-mysql-54-performance/comment-page-1/#comment-552509</link>
		<dc:creator>Roland Bouman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2009 08:39:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/?p=674#comment-552509</guid>
		<description>Peter, all clear, thanks!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Peter, all clear, thanks!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: peter</title>
		<link>http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2009/04/29/call-for-opinions-do-we-need-mysql-50-with-mysql-54-performance/comment-page-1/#comment-552331</link>
		<dc:creator>peter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2009 03:10:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/?p=674#comment-552331</guid>
		<description>Roland,

&quot;may break&quot; is experience based.  All optimizer changes I&#039;ve seen over last 10 years broke something. They typically fixed more things than they broke but it is not good enough for applications already in production -  they typically have  worked around things and tuned them for old optimizer behavior so new behavior may be unwanted.  At least it should not be treated lightly and requires good testing on upgrade.

Some old regressions in 6.0  (I&#039;m not sure how many of them are fixed now) can be seen here:
http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2008/04/10/tpc-h-run-on-mysql-51-and-60/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Roland,</p>
<p>&#8220;may break&#8221; is experience based.  All optimizer changes I&#8217;ve seen over last 10 years broke something. They typically fixed more things than they broke but it is not good enough for applications already in production &#8211;  they typically have  worked around things and tuned them for old optimizer behavior so new behavior may be unwanted.  At least it should not be treated lightly and requires good testing on upgrade.</p>
<p>Some old regressions in 6.0  (I&#8217;m not sure how many of them are fixed now) can be seen here:<br />
<a href="http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2008/04/10/tpc-h-run-on-mysql-51-and-60/" rel="nofollow">http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2008/04/10/tpc-h-run-on-mysql-51-and-60/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Callaghan</title>
		<link>http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2009/04/29/call-for-opinions-do-we-need-mysql-50-with-mysql-54-performance/comment-page-1/#comment-552325</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Callaghan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2009 03:06:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/?p=674#comment-552325</guid>
		<description>Can we call it the Pergoogle patch? Or is it the Goocona patch?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Can we call it the Pergoogle patch? Or is it the Goocona patch?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
