I’ve been considering using TokuDB for a large dataset, primarily because of its high compression. The data is append-only, never updated, rarely read, and purged after a configurable time.
I use partitions to drop old data a day at a time. It’s much more efficient than deleting rows, and it lets me avoid indexing the data on the time dimension. Partitioning serves as a crude form of indexing, as well as helping purge old data.
I wondered if TokuDB supports partitioning. Then I remembered some older posts from the Tokutek blog about partitioning. The claim is that “there are almost always better (higher performing, more robust, lower maintenance) alternatives to partitioning.”
I’m not sure this is true for my use case, for a couple of reasons.
First, I clearly fall into the only category that the flowchart acknowledges may be a good use case for partitioning: I do need instant block deletes. Paying for data ingestion as well as purging doesn’t make sense in my case. It’s like eating a hot hot curry—I don’t want to feel the pain on the way out too :-)
Secondly, data size matters a lot. If I need to create a redundant index on the timestamp dimension, no matter how good TokuDB’s compression is, it’ll inflate my storage and I/O costs. And make my backups bigger, and so on, and so on. I don’t want an index that I don’t need. My queries operate very efficiently without the timestamp index, and creating one only to help delete older data fast wouldn’t make sense.
In the end I got sidetracked and decided to write this blog post. And I didn’t find out whether TokuDB supports partitioning or not! Silly me.