El Mar 01 Mar 2005 18:29, Heikki Tuuri escribió: > Alfredo, > I have changed my my.cnf to try and include the suggestions from the list, as much as possible and try to run my program again. It now reads like this:
innodb_data_file_path = ibdata1:2G;ibdata2:2G:autoextend set-variable = innodb_buffer_pool_size=256M set-variable = innodb_additional_mem_pool_size=32M set-variable = innodb_log_file_size=64M set-variable = innodb_log_buffer_size=8M innodb_flush_log_at_trx_commit=1 set-variable = innodb_lock_wait_timeout=50 The MyISAM database is 1Gb in size, and the resulting InnoDB table space is 4 Gb. In my laptop (I have to test here before I decide to implement in the server), the time has dropped from 4 hours to 70 minutes. With MyISAM tables, it takes 12 minutes. Although the reduction in time is substantial, I still think it should be better. InnoDB is supposed to provide transactions and row level locking, which I need to improve concurrency, "without compromising the speed of MySQL". We have other processes that need to be run on a weekly basis that do a lot (45,000 records need to be examined) of select sum() for a one year period, from a table with 1 million+ rows and then updates a table with 800,000 rows, and so far it takes around 12 hours, even after enclosing between BEGIN and COMMIT statements. Could be entirely our fault. Have to check that too. Will try with this new setup and see how it goes. Thank you all. -- Alfredo J. Cole Grupo ACyC www.acyc.com - www.clshonduras.com - SolCom - www.acycdomains.com -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
