<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	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/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Pythian Blog &#187; query cache</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.pythian.com/news/tag/query-cache/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.pythian.com/news</link>
	<description>News and views from Pythian DBAs</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 09:54:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Is the query cache useful?</title>
		<link>http://www.pythian.com/news/4142/is-the-query-cache-useful/</link>
		<comments>http://www.pythian.com/news/4142/is-the-query-cache-useful/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 22:17:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Sheeri Cabral</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[MySQL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[benchmark]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cache]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pythian]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[query cache]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pythian.com/news/?p=4142</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Mark Callaghan posted a good test of the MySQL query cache in different versions. His tests clearly show that in 5.0.44 and 5.0.84 and 5.1.38, there is more query throughput when the query cache is disabled. However, the tests are skewed &#8212; not on purpose, I am sure, and Mark admits he has not used [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.pythian.com/news/4142/is-the-query-cache-useful/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>11</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why You Want to Switch to MySQL 5.1</title>
		<link>http://www.pythian.com/news/1168/why-you-want-to-switch-to-mysql-51/</link>
		<comments>http://www.pythian.com/news/1168/why-you-want-to-switch-to-mysql-51/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 Aug 2008 14:23:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Sheeri Cabral</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[MySQL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Non-Tech Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[alter table]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[auto increment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[autoincrement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[auto_increment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[InnoDB]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[logging]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mysql 5.1]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[online alter table]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[online logging]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[prepared statements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[processlist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[query cache]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[release]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[show full processlist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[show processlist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[table-based logging]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pythian.com/blogs/1168/why-you-want-to-switch-to-mysql-51</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In two words: online operations. In a paragraph: Forget partitioning, row-based replication and events. The big reasons most people are going to salivate over 5.1, and probably start plans to upgrade now, are the online operations: online ALTER TABLE for column rename, column default value change, and adding values to the end of an ENUM/SET [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.pythian.com/news/1168/why-you-want-to-switch-to-mysql-51/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>14</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

