>> Might the NFS dependence be a problem?
>Yes, it could , particularly if you do not have --skip-locking as
>mysqld startup or if some other processes access the files.
>Regards,
>Sinisa
Hi Sinisa,
What does "some other processes access the files" mean? Are you thinking
like automated system backup software, or my own database client
accesses?
"configure" apparently placed -skip-locking into safe_mysqld, so I have
always been running with this option on Linux.
Since Saturday AM,
- I moved all databases ("/var") onto my /tmp disk,
- forced table operations to occur 12 times a day,
and cannot replicate the original problem, so stability has returned.
So, either:
1. should not be using -skip-locking on NFS,
2. NFS implementation + Linux should not be used (i.e., continue
using a local disk).
Do I really need -skip-locking on a Linux 2.2.12 kernel?
=> I rolled up a fcntl() test fragment, and it seems to work with
2 unrelated processes:
<stuff>
lk.l_type = F_WRLCK; /* advisory lock on entire file. */
fcntl(fd, F_SETLK, &lk)
<stuff>
lk.l_type = F_UNLCK;
fcntl(fd, F_SETLK, &lk)
I assume "configure" knows best about my system's fcntl() lock
implementation and that it would do the correct thing? Should I
try an NFS usage mode w/o -skip-locking, or will this create
other more serious errors on Linux?
Thanks for the pointers.
Silvio
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Before posting, please check:
http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual)
http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive)
To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
