Henrik Ingo wrote:
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 9:14 PM, Igor Babaev <igor@askmonty.org> wrote:
1. the author of the original patch 2. our community members (not only PeterZ!) 3. our developers
what term they prefer 'Segmented Key Cache' or 'Partitioned Key Cache'.
To be quite honest I also should mention that MichaelR from Oracle/MySQL introduced in 5.5 a possibility for MySQL partitions in MyISAM to use different key caches for different partitions. Before that all partitions could use only default key caches. This feature is 100% orthogonal to the discussed key cache partitioning.
This was the only reason for the rename. (It is also the reason the rename was done after the implementation, and very fast, because we had to decide on a name before Monty's keynote.) Henrik,
Look at Monty's keynote slide #12: it calls the feature clearly "Partitioned Key Cache" (see http://en.oreilly.com/mysql2010/public/schedule/detail/12443) BTW, the slides were prepared NOT by me. Regards, Igor.
So the main issue is to choose a name that will avoid confusion with the feature Mikael R has implemented. I think anything that achieves this can still be considered.
Mikael R did not call his new functionality for partition tables at all because what he just lifted one of the limitations of his original implementation: each MyISAM partition was a regular MyISAM table, but not quite. In particular indexes of this table could not be assigned to non-default key caches. So Mikael lifted this limitation. He did not have to touch the key cache code at all.
In any case, it is not the intent to change anything in the code, except I guess we need to syncronize the name of the feature with the user visible variable names.
henrik