On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 21:32:08 +0200, laredotornado@zipmail.com
<laredotornado@zipmail.com> wrote:
> Currently at my hosting company, we are using MySQL 5.0. All our
> tables are of InnoDB type. I chose this at one time b/c it supported
> use of foreign key constraints. My hosting company now tells me
> InnoDB tables are not optimized for disk usage reporting in real
> time.

And you told them it is not your job to report disk usage to them, or do
you have a job there instead of being a client? If they are really
complaining, just switch. It should not be a big deal. Why the hell would
the need 'real-time' disk usage by the way? An average to control wether
you're not using more then you pay for, and a server not overclogged with
clients all to the max should be all they need.

> 1. Is there another table type I can use that supports foreign key
> constraints that is better for disk usage reporting?
>
> 2. Is there another table type I can use that supports foreign key
> constraints and uses less disk space?

Sorry, don't know the answer to those 2, never needed to jump through
hoops for that...

> 3. How can I change the type of a table without losing the data?

ALTER TABLE tablename ENGINE = enginename;

What repercussions this has for your relations etc. would depend on what
engine to what engine.

Moral of the story: disk space is dirt cheap. Cases where the hours you
spent on tracking use and minimizing it are more costeffective then just
to buy more/bigger ones are rare, very rare.
--
Rik Wasmus