-->-----Original Message----- -->From: Jeremy Zawodny [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -->Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2003 11:51 AM -->To: Dathan Vance Pattishall -->Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -->Subject: Re: What are the effects of key_buffer on a dedicated slave -->[also] --> -->On Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 11:36:30AM -0700, Dathan Vance Pattishall wrote: -->> -->> Yes, I use a custom mytop (sent my patches in to you). In fact I'm -->> making a signed java applet to simulate mytop, just to be fancy ;) as -->> well as not having to ssh into a central box that can reach all my -->> servers. --> -->Really? Which patch? Have I integrated it yet? :-)
Patch Contained SLAVE / Master Positions as well as which databases are ignored or slaved, and a full list of possible keys Command (E). I can resend another patch; I've made some changes since. --> -->This helps no matter how many readers/writers you have. It's a cache. Cool, makes sense now. The key_buffer was to low. The RAID drives where being hit nearly on every SELECT and reducing resources for the dirty buffer from being flushed as often as it needed to be. Thanks Dathan --> -->Jeremy -->-- -->Jeremy D. Zawodny | Perl, Web, MySQL, Linux Magazine, Yahoo! --><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | http://jeremy.zawodny.com/ --> -->MySQL 4.0.15-Yahoo-SMP: up 16 days, processed 586,742,904 queries -->(404/sec. avg) --> -->-- -->MySQL General Mailing List -->For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql -->To unsubscribe: -->http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
