Well I guess it depends on what is meant by "Default". I was using RH8 and had no such issues, even with RH7...
I think it's important to note the filesystem chosen can make a huge difference. as of RH8 and onward I'd suggest EXT3, especially for Peter's issue of possible corruption - because it is a fully journalling filesystem. of course, a filesystem cannot (and will not) overcome issues with the software or OS itself. It's always best to use the latest "stable" Mysql (4.0.18 as of last I checked), and don't always upgrade "just because". too many admins will upgrade just because the latest thing is out, if it's working, stable, etc, leave it alone. don't fix it if it aint broke. the point is, choosing the right options during install. myself, I never had an issue with the defaults, even back as far as RH7, using files larger than 2gigs with mysql. perhaps because I always choose the best file system available at the time. I chose journalling as soon as it was available, things like ReiserFS come to mind. for me, large files was always the default, never had to choose it manually or change any settings. oh well... Dan. On Wed, 7 Apr 2004, Peter J Milanese wrote: > I ran into the same issues on RH8, with a default implmentation. It can be > overcome, but the mysql failed to > write to the table after 2gb or so. It turned out to be a filesystem > limitation issue, which was fixable. I am > not sure, but given the size of files nowadays, RH9 defaults probably take > care of it. I am currently running > several very large tables on RH8 (5-30G) and it is stable. One should > always beware that large tables > can easily be corrupted, and are not a joy to recover though :-/ > > > P > > > > > > Alan Williamson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > 04/06/2004 05:57 PM > > To: Dan Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: MySQL on Linux > > > Thank you, a much reasoned and sensible reply. > > This is information people can use, as oppose to the posts that 'say > well its okay for me, you must be stupid' types. > > ;) > > > Dan Nelson wrote: > > > In the last episode (Apr 06), Alan Williamson said: > > > >>>the most popular would have been Red Hat, which doesn't have this > >>>limit you speak of, even plain vanilla install (no twiddling > >>>needed). > >> > >>Not to spoil a perfectly good pontification ... but i have to say > >>that we have a Redhat8 distribution running on a Dell PowerEdge > >>Server and when Apache gets to the 2GB size on its access file, it > >>does indeed stop. This is not old hardware (12months old). > > > > > > That is because although Linux binaries can access files over 2gb, they > > do not do so by default. Apache was probably not compiled with the > > required defines (-D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64), so > > that's why it stops at 2gb even though both the kernel and filesystem > > most likely do support larger files. > > > > > >>So the question still remains. What would happen in MySQL when that > >>file isn't allowed to grow any further? > > > > > > Mysql's configure script checks for systems that require special flags > > to access large files, so no mysql binaries should have this problem on > > modern Linux systems (i.e. any 2.4 kernel) > > > -- > 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] > > -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
