This can be a question just with regard to asking:

Barring all intermediate to advanced subjects or techniques (clustered indices, BULK Card inserts, export/import methods, etc.), does an Place take more time the bigger a table develops?

This assumes that there's just one auto-int column, ID [i.e., brand new rows are Placed at the end, where no memory needs to shuffled to support a particular row positioning].


A hyperlink to some good "benchmarking MySQL" could be handy. I required Oracle in class, and to date the understanding has been doing me little good on SO.

Thanks everybody.

My experience continues to be that performance degrades when the dataset index no more matches memory. Once that occurs, inspections for duplicate indexes will need to hit disk and it'll decelerate substantially. Create a table with just as much data while you think you'll suffer from, and perform some testing and tuning. It is the easiest method to understand what you'll encounter.

Yes, but it is not how big the table by itself but how big the indices that matter. Once index spinning starts to thrash the disk, you will find a downturn. A table without any indexes (obviously, you'd not have this type of factor inside your database) should see no degradation. A table with minimal compact indexes can grow to some very relatively large size without seeing degradation. A table with lots of large indices will begin to degrade sooner.

I'm able to only share my experience. hope it will help.

I'm placing plenty of rows at that time, on huge database (several countless records). I've got a script which prints time pre and post I execute the card inserts. well I've not seen any stop by performances.

Hope it gave an idea, however i am on sqlite this is not on mysql.

The rate isn't affected as lengthy as MySQL can update the entire index in memory, if this starts to swap the index it might be reduced. This is exactly what happens should you rebuild a massive index instantly using ALTER TABLE.