Even with only 16 Mo, your query cache is quite efficient (78% of your queries are fetched directly from the cache).
Try to increaze your query_cache_size until there's no more additional lowmem_prunes reported.
And executed from time to time FLUSH QUERY CACHE to defragment your query cache.


  Jocelyn

Mauricio Pellegrini a écrit :
Thanks these are fresh results

| query_cache_limit            | 1048576  |
| query_cache_min_res_unit     | 4096     |


show status like "ques%"; +---------------+----------+ | Variable_name | Value | +---------------+----------+ | Questions | 14189604 | +---------------+----------+


show status like "qcache%"; +-------------------------+----------+ | Variable_name | Value | +-------------------------+----------+ | Qcache_free_blocks | 2731 | | Qcache_free_memory | 12372064 | | Qcache_hits | 11156553 | | Qcache_inserts | 1945643 | | Qcache_lowmem_prunes | 372898 | | Qcache_not_cached | 509594 | | Qcache_queries_in_cache | 4101 | | Qcache_total_blocks | 11000 | +-------------------------+----------+


On Wed, 2005-03-09 at 20:19, Jocelyn Fournier wrote:

Hi,

How many questions for thoses results ?
There's a lot of lowmem_prunes, so I would indeed increase the memory size to reduce the risk of lowmem_prunes.
What is your query_cache_limit ?


  Jocelyn

Mauricio Pellegrini a écrit :

Thanks,  this the result of show status like "qcache%"

+-------------------------+----------+
| Variable_name           | Value    |
+-------------------------+----------+
| Qcache_free_blocks      | 3330     |
| Qcache_free_memory      | 13372320 |
| Qcache_hits             | 11119149 |
| Qcache_inserts          | 1942009  |
| Qcache_lowmem_prunes    | 372898   |
| Qcache_not_cached       | 508528   |
| Qcache_queries_in_cache | 3160     |
| Qcache_total_blocks     | 9711     |
+-------------------------+----------+

Am I right at saying that the value (16Mb)is ok ?

Qcache_not_cached means the number of query results that didn't get into
the cache because of a space limitation ? If so, perhaps adding few more Mb would improve that number , isn't it?





On Wed, 2005-03-09 at 19:30, Dan Nelson wrote:


In the last episode (Mar 09), Mauricio Pellegrini said:


Hi, I'm trying to tweak the execution time for querys on my mysql
server which is using InnoDB.

I know that there are a lot of things to check but one of them,
perhaps not the most important, is the query_cache_size.

I have a dual Xeon cpu with 4gb of ram and this is a Linux dedicated
server which runs only Apache and Mysql 4.1.5

I've declared Query_cache_size = 16M in the my.cnf file and I would
say that in the whole we have 60% of select querys and a 40% of
update querys.

Is Query_cache_size=16M too conservative considering that I have 4Gb
of ram ?

A better question is: what is your current utilization of that 16MB cache? The query cache flushes any results dependant on a table when that table is modified, so if you really have 40% updates, chances are that very few queries are cachable at all. Run

show status like 'qcache%';

, and take a look at free_memory, inserts, and hits.

--
        Dan Nelson
        [EMAIL PROTECTED]






-- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]



Reply via email to