Show HN: I built a MySQL storage engine which is InnoDB compatible

No transactions? Single-threaded? Global lock?<p>Don&#x27;t want to put anyone&#x27;s work down, but at first sight this looks much more like MyISAM than InnoDB - and just like this, MyISAM&#x27;s a helluva lot faster than InnoDB for single writer workloads throwing ACID out of the window.<p>Just that MyISAM is battle tested over the course of several years. Again, interested to see what comes out of it, but if history is a lesson, it&#x27;s usually easier to go from correct to fast (PostgreSQL) than from fast to correct (MySQL et al.).

The upscaledb FAQ indicates &quot;it is not yet concurrent; it uses a big lock to make sure that only one thread can access the upscaledb environment at a time&quot;.<p>InnoDB is designed for concurrency (using MVCC, granular locking, etc) so I&#x27;d expect it to be slower at single-threaded workloads than another engine that skips all that.<p>Only using single-threaded benchmarking is a bit misleading, imo. This is mentioned in the article but only in a small bullet point towards the bottom.

Performance is great, but what is more interesting is maintaining that performance in the midst of failures and things going wrong.<p>I don&#x27;t know anyone who chooses InnoDB and says &quot;gee I wish it were faster&quot;. While it isn&#x27;t the fastest show in town, it is a known quantity, and how it breaks is well understood.<p>So if I was going to use a different storage engine, would want something more than its a bit faster, in some cases.<p>Having said that, what a wonderful amount of work, and don&#x27;t stop hacking on it!

Stopped reading after no transactions. Theory question: musn&#x27;t transactions reduce necessarily performance?

MySQL Product Manager here. Any feedback on the Storage Engine API?

My physics teacher would have slapped those diagrams around my head asking &quot;Is the y-axis 6000 apples?&quot;

I think this could be pretty neat, it&#x27;ll be interesting to see how it evolves. However, looking at the comments people have left here I would suggest putting up a table&#x2F;comparison with InnoDB side by side, detailing which features are implemented, which are not and which are but aren&#x27;t available through the SQL layer yet.<p>This would also put the &quot;compatible with InnoDB&quot; thing in perspective for people and potentially clear up some other confusion.

Label your axes!

This looks pretty sexy. Are there atomicity guarantees?