# Merge table Vs Big Table

**URL:** <https://forums.percona.com/t/merge-table-vs-big-table/668>\
**Category:** Other MySQL® Questions\
**Created:** [March 10, 2008, 3:17am UTC](https://forums.percona.com/t/merge-table-vs-big-table/668 "2008-03-10T03:17:21Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![yobogs](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/9e8a1a/32.png) [@yobogs](https://forums.percona.com/u/yobogs)\
**Post date:** [March 10, 2008, 3:17am UTC](https://forums.percona.com/t/merge-table-vs-big-table/668/1 "2008-03-10T03:17:21Z")

</div>

Hello,

First, sorry for my English 😉

I have a Merge table with 70 millions lines (in 70 tables) and i insert 1 million line each week.

I use this merge table to insert, select and delete data.

I would like to know if it’s better for performance (insert and select, i don’t make many delete) to have 1 table with 70 millions lines or my merge table.

Tks for your help

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![sterin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/3ab097/32.png) [@sterin](https://forums.percona.com/u/sterin)\
**Post date:** [March 14, 2008, 5:08pm UTC](https://forums.percona.com/t/merge-table-vs-big-table/668/2 "2008-03-14T17:08:47Z")

</div>

Are you always selecting/inserting using the merge table and not the child tables?

Have you split out the child tables on different disks or are they all stored on the same disk?

If your answers are yes to the two above you will probably not notice any direct difference between using merge or just one large table.  
In that case the load on the server is mostly dependent on the total size of the database and then it doesn’t really matter in what way the data i stored. The size is still the same and it is still as hard to search through.