Re: Queue / FIFO in MySQL?
Please check out http://q4m.31tools.com/*. *It is a message queue storage engine with sql interface. Havent used it in a production setup though we did some tests. -- Thanks Alex http://alexlurthu.wordpress.com
Re: Reset of Status Parameters
I would also add Baron's maakit http://www.maatkit.org/ ( innotop ) for innodb details to the arsenal. On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 3:11 PM, Ian Simpson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I tend to use the 'mytop' program, which shows the average > queries/second for the entire lifetime and for the last 5 seconds, as > well as showing a bunch of other statistics and a list of running > queries. It's a handy little monitoring tool. > > On Fri, 2008-06-20 at 12:17 +0530, Venu Madhav Padakanti wrote: > > I am using MySQL version 5.0.22, I am interested in knowing the current > > performance on the MySQL. > > > > With the status command we can get the queries per second but it will > > average since the beginning of time when SQL was up and running and not > > the current rate? > > > > Is there any way to reset that parameter so that the data can reflect > > current without restarting the MySQL > > > > Thanks in advance > > ..venu > -- > Ian Simpson > System Administrator > MyJobGroup > > This email may contain confidential information and is intended for the > recipient(s) only. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected > this email, please notify the author by replying to this email. If you are > not the intended recipient(s) disclosure, distribution, copying or printing > of this email is strictly prohibited and you should destroy this mail. > Information or opinions in this message shall not be treated as neither > given nor endorsed by the company. Neither the company nor the sender > accepts any responsibility for viruses or other destructive elements and it > is your responsibility to scan any attachments. -- Thanks Alex http://alexlurthu.wordpress.com
Re: Very slow inserts into InnoDB tables
replication based inserts are serial whereas most of the time the inserts on masters are concurrent. this leads to the slaves falling behind. to tackle this we have used the following strategies : 1. Use raid 0 on the slaves (master users raid 10) so as to speed up writes. 2. pre fetch and cache the data that needs to be modified by the slave sql thread. 3. set innodb flush trx log commit to 2 or even 0. 4. Out of desperation sometimes disable innodb double write and also xa support. On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 7:33 PM, Ian Simpson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi guys, thanks for pitching in. > > The inserts are from replication; we're not using transactions on the > master (yet), and I don't think there's a way of telling MySQL to batch > incoming replication statements if they're not already in a transaction. > > Disk usage: the older server (the one that's running fine) is running > more transactions per second, but has lower blocks written and read per > second than the new server: > > The working server (which in addition to replicating is also handling a > bunch of read queries) > > Device: tps Blk_read/s Blk_wrtn/s Blk_read Blk_wrtn > sda 88.47 782.20 998.77 9046888130 11551757459 > > The new server, which is just trying to handle replication > > Device: tps Blk_read/s Blk_wrtn/s Blk_read Blk_wrtn > sda 77.83 1367.55 2914.72 358474084 764029986 > > Thanks, > > -- > Ian Simpson > > > > > On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 19:15 +0530, Alex Arul Lurthu wrote: > > also how often do you issue a commit. batching the inserts inside a > > transaction might help. > > > > On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 6:53 PM, Ananda Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > check for iostat to see if the disk is heavly used. > > > > > > On 6/13/08, Ian Simpson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > > > Configurations are identical, other than the > > differences I initially > > mentioned. I've diffed both the configuration files > > and the output of > > SHOW VARIABLES on both servers. > > > > I've contacted my hosting provider to ask about the > > RAID settings. > > > > Variable_name: innodb_flush_log_at_trx_commit > > Value: 1 > > Variable_name: sync_binlog > > Value: 0 > > Variable_name: innodb_locks_unsafe_for_binlog > > Value: OFF > > > > Thanks > > > > -- > > Ian Simpson > > > > On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 17:43 +0530, Alex Arul Lurthu > > wrote: > > > Please check if the my.cnf configurations to be the > > same. > > > > > > What are your configuration parameters in terms of > > innodh flush log > > > trx commit , bin logging, sync binlog and innodb > > unsafe for binlog ? > > > > > > If the systems have raid, check if the BBWC is > > enabled on the new host > > > and WB is enabled. > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Ian Simpson > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > wrote: > > > Hi list, > > > > > > Have a bit of a mystery here that I hope > > somebody can help > > > with. > > > > > > I've just got a new server that I'm using as > > a dedicated MySQL > > > server. > > > In terms of hardware it's pretty much > > identical, if not > > > slightly > > > superior to an existing server already in > > production use. > > > > > > It's having a real struggle processing > > INSERT statements to > > > InnoDB > > > tables; it's maxing out at around 100 > > inserts per second, even > > > with very > > > simple two column tables (inserts into > > MyISAM tables run > > > fine). > > > Meanwhile, the original server can happily > > process around 1000 > > > inserts/sec into an identical table. > > > > > > The MySQL configuration of the two databases > > is identical, > > > except for > > > the tablespace file size (the new server has > > a larger > > > tablespace > > > defined), and the InnoDB logs (again, new > > server has larger > > > logs). > > > > > > Can anybody suggest an area of investigation > > as to the cause? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > -- > > > Ian Simpson > > > > > > This email may contain confidential > > information and is > > > intended for the recipient(s) only. If an > > addressing or > > > transmission error has misd
Re: Very slow inserts into InnoDB tables
also how often do you issue a commit. batching the inserts inside a transaction might help. On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 6:53 PM, Ananda Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > check for iostat to see if the disk is heavly used. > > On 6/13/08, Ian Simpson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Hi Alex, >> >> Configurations are identical, other than the differences I initially >> mentioned. I've diffed both the configuration files and the output of >> SHOW VARIABLES on both servers. >> >> I've contacted my hosting provider to ask about the RAID settings. >> >> Variable_name: innodb_flush_log_at_trx_commit >>Value: 1 >> Variable_name: sync_binlog >>Value: 0 >> Variable_name: innodb_locks_unsafe_for_binlog >>Value: OFF >> >> Thanks >> >> -- >> Ian Simpson >> >> On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 17:43 +0530, Alex Arul Lurthu wrote: >> > Please check if the my.cnf configurations to be the same. >> > >> > What are your configuration parameters in terms of innodh flush log >> > trx commit , bin logging, sync binlog and innodb unsafe for binlog ? >> > >> > If the systems have raid, check if the BBWC is enabled on the new host >> > and WB is enabled. >> > >> > >> > On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Ian Simpson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> > wrote: >> > Hi list, >> > >> > Have a bit of a mystery here that I hope somebody can help >> > with. >> > >> > I've just got a new server that I'm using as a dedicated MySQL >> > server. >> > In terms of hardware it's pretty much identical, if not >> > slightly >> > superior to an existing server already in production use. >> > >> > It's having a real struggle processing INSERT statements to >> > InnoDB >> > tables; it's maxing out at around 100 inserts per second, even >> > with very >> > simple two column tables (inserts into MyISAM tables run >> > fine). >> > Meanwhile, the original server can happily process around 1000 >> > inserts/sec into an identical table. >> > >> > The MySQL configuration of the two databases is identical, >> > except for >> > the tablespace file size (the new server has a larger >> > tablespace >> > defined), and the InnoDB logs (again, new server has larger >> > logs). >> > >> > Can anybody suggest an area of investigation as to the cause? >> > >> > Thanks, >> > -- >> > Ian Simpson >> > >> > This email may contain confidential information and is >> > intended for the recipient(s) only. If an addressing or >> > transmission error has misdirected this email, please notify >> > the author by replying to this email. If you are not the >> > intended recipient(s) disclosure, distribution, copying or >> > printing of this email is strictly prohibited and you should >> > destroy this mail. Information or opinions in this message >> > shall not be treated as neither given nor endorsed by the >> > company. Neither the company nor the sender accepts any >> > responsibility for viruses or other destructive elements and >> > it is your responsibility to scan any attachments. >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Thanks >> > Alex >> > http://alexlurthu.wordpress.com >> >> This email may contain confidential information and is intended for the >> recipient(s) only. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected >> this email, please notify the author by replying to this email. If you are >> not the intended recipient(s) disclosure, distribution, copying or printing >> of this email is strictly prohibited and you should destroy this mail. >> Information or opinions in this message shall not be treated as neither >> given nor endorsed by the company. Neither the company nor the sender >> accepts any responsibility for viruses or other destructive elements and it >> is your responsibility to scan any attachments. > > > -- Thanks Alex http://alexlurthu.wordpress.com
Re: Very slow inserts into InnoDB tables
Please check if the my.cnf configurations to be the same. What are your configuration parameters in terms of innodh flush log trx commit , bin logging, sync binlog and innodb unsafe for binlog ? If the systems have raid, check if the BBWC is enabled on the new host and WB is enabled. On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Ian Simpson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi list, > > Have a bit of a mystery here that I hope somebody can help with. > > I've just got a new server that I'm using as a dedicated MySQL server. > In terms of hardware it's pretty much identical, if not slightly > superior to an existing server already in production use. > > It's having a real struggle processing INSERT statements to InnoDB > tables; it's maxing out at around 100 inserts per second, even with very > simple two column tables (inserts into MyISAM tables run fine). > Meanwhile, the original server can happily process around 1000 > inserts/sec into an identical table. > > The MySQL configuration of the two databases is identical, except for > the tablespace file size (the new server has a larger tablespace > defined), and the InnoDB logs (again, new server has larger logs). > > Can anybody suggest an area of investigation as to the cause? > > Thanks, > -- > Ian Simpson > > This email may contain confidential information and is intended for the > recipient(s) only. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected > this email, please notify the author by replying to this email. If you are > not the intended recipient(s) disclosure, distribution, copying or printing > of this email is strictly prohibited and you should destroy this mail. > Information or opinions in this message shall not be treated as neither > given nor endorsed by the company. Neither the company nor the sender > accepts any responsibility for viruses or other destructive elements and it > is your responsibility to scan any attachments. -- Thanks Alex http://alexlurthu.wordpress.com
Re: Circular replication
Chain replication is fine as long as reading stale data from the last slave in your chain is ok. the staleness depends on the write throughput and capacity of the intermediate slaves. But Chain replication with circular replication is a definite no no in prod since if any intermediate fails, you will not be able to restore it easily and the data goes out of sync. On Dec 5, 2007 12:31 AM, Krishna Chandra Prajapati <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi All, > > Is circular replication or chain replication is suitable for production > environment. Whether any testing has been done. If yes then, Please let me > know. There is any other issue related to circular replication. > > Thanks > -- > Krishna Chandra Prajapati > MySQL DBA, > Ed Ventures e-Learning Pvt.Ltd. > 1-8-303/48/15, Sindhi Colony > P.G.Road, Secunderabad. > Pin Code: 53 > Office Number: 040-66489771 > Mob: 9912924044 > URL: ed-ventures-online.com > Email-id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- Thanks Alex http://alexlurthu.wordpress.com
Re: Determining Table Storage Engine Type on Crashed Table
How about looking at the .frm file of the table. On 11/28/07, Richard Edward Horner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > FYI, this did not work :) > > Thanks though! > > Rich(ard) > > On Nov 23, 2007 3:37 AM, Paul McCullagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > Maybe this will work: > > > > SHOW CREATE TABLE table_name; > > > > > > On Nov 21, 2007, at 9:42 PM, Richard Edward Horner wrote: > > > > > Hey everybody, > > > > > > Hopefully some of you are already enjoying time off. I am not...yet :) > > > > > > Anyway, is there a way to determine what storage engine a table is > > > using if it's crashed? When it's fine, I can just run: > > > > > > mysql> show table status like 'table_name'; > > > +-++-++ > > > ++-+--+-- > > > +---++- > > > +-+-+--- > > > +--++-+ > > > | Name| Engine | Version | Row_format | Rows | > > > Avg_row_length | Data_length | Max_data_length | Index_length | > > > Data_free | Auto_increment | Create_time | Update_time > > > | Check_time | Collation | Checksum | Create_options > > > | Comment | > > > +-++-++ > > > ++-+--+-- > > > +---++- > > > +-+-+--- > > > +--++-+ > > > | table_name | MyISAM | 10 | Fixed | 985984 | 13 > > > |12817792 | 3659174697238527 | 34238464 | 0 | > > > 1182153 | 2007-11-15 17:44:28 | 2007-11-21 15:28:07 | 2007-11-21 > > > 15:28:18 | latin1_swedish_ci | NULL || | > > > +-++-++ > > > ++-+--+-- > > > +---++- > > > +-+-+--- > > > +--++-+ > > > 1 row in set (0.00 sec) > > > > > > As you can see, the second column returned is the Engine. In this > > > case, MyISAM. Now, if I crash the table, it doesn't work: > > > > > > mysql> show table status like 'table_name'; > > > +-++-++-- > > > ++-+-+-- > > > +---++-+- > > > ++---+--+ > > > +- > > > ---+ > > > | Name| Engine | Version | Row_format | Rows | Avg_row_length > > > | Data_length | Max_data_length | Index_length | Data_free | > > > Auto_increment | Create_time | Update_time | Check_time | Collation | > > > Checksum | Create_options | Comment > > > | > > > +-++-++-- > > > ++-+-+-- > > > +---++-+- > > > ++---+--+ > > > +- > > > ---+ > > > | table_name | NULL |NULL | NULL | NULL | NULL | > > >NULL |NULL | NULL | NULL | > > > NULL | NULL| NULL| NULL | NULL | NULL | > > > NULL | Table './blah/table_name' is marked as crashed and > > > should be repaired | > > > +-++-++-- > > > ++-+-+-- > > > +---++-+- > > > ++---+--+ > > > +- > > > ---+ > > > 1 row in set (0.00 sec) > > > > > > Now, let's assume for a moment this were an InnoDB table. If I were to > > > try and run repair, it would say that the storage engine does not > > > support repair so clearly it knows what the storage engine is. How do > > > I get it to tell me? Or I guess a broader more helpful question would > > > be, "What are all the ways to determine a table's storage engine > > > type?" > > > > > > Thanks, > > > -- > > > Richard Edward Horner > > > Engineer / Composer / Electric Guitar Virtuoso > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > http://richhorner.com - updated June 28th > > > > > > -- > > > MySQL General Mailing List > > > For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql > > > To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql? > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Richard Edward Horner > Engineer / Composer / Electric Guitar Virtuoso > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http:
Re: "show slave staus"
You can set pager command to grep out unwanted fields. On 11/28/07, bruce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > hi.. > > simple question!! > > mysql> show slave status > > returns a number of fields, with information on the status of the slave. is > there a way to only return the field(s) i'm interested in... > > i thought that i had figured this out, but i can't recall, and it's been > awhile since i've played with this! > > thanks > > > -- > MySQL General Mailing List > For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql > To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Sent from Gmail for mobile | mobile.google.com Thanks Alex http://alexlurthu.wordpress.com -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SELECT Speed
The second query might be faster due to caching. On 11/26/07, Alexander Bespalov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > I have a problem with SELECT speed. The first execution takes up to several > minutes while the next (with the same statement) takes not more then several > seconds. > > The statement example is: > select nas.nasIpAddress, count(distinct(acct.user_id)), count(*), > sum(acct.acctOutputOctets) from acct, nas, can, acctStatusType where > acct.can_id = can.id and acct.acctStatusType_id = acctStatusType.id and > acct.day >= '2007-09-01' > and acct.day <= '2007-11-01' > and acct.nas_id = nas.id > and can.can = 10 > and acctStatusType.acctStatusType = 'Stop' > group by acct.nas_id > ; > > EXPLAIN shows the following: > ++-++++- > ---+-+-+---++ > | id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key > | key_len | ref | rows | Extra | > ++-++++- > ---+-+-+---++ > | 1 | SIMPLE | can| const | PRIMARY,can| can > | 2 | const | 1 | Using filesort | > | 1 | SIMPLE | acctStatusType | const | PRIMARY,acctStatusType | > acctStatusType | 10 | const | 1 || > | 1 | SIMPLE | acct | ref| index1 | > index1 | 4 | const,const | 63827 | Using where| > | 1 | SIMPLE | nas| eq_ref | PRIMARY| > PRIMARY| 4 | GWF.acct.nas_id | 1 || > ++-++++- > ---+-+-+---++ > > I have the following table with 59742411 rows: > mysql> describe acct; > +---+---+--+-+-- > ---+---+ > | Field | Type | Null | Key | Default > | Extra | > +---+---+--+-+-- > ---+---+ > | date | datetime | | | -00-00 > 00:00:00 | | > | user_id | int(10) unsigned | | PRI | 0 > | | > | nas_id| int(10) unsigned | | PRI | 0 > | | > | can | smallint(5) unsigned | YES | | NULL > | | > | can_id| smallint(5) unsigned | YES | MUL | NULL > | | > | acctStatusType_id | tinyint(3) unsigned | | PRI | 0 > | | > | acctTerminateCause_id | tinyint(3) unsigned | | | 0 > | | > | sweetEventContext_id | tinyint(3) unsigned | | | 0 > | | > | acctSessionId | varchar(8)| | PRI | > | | > | acctDelayTime | mediumint(8) unsigned | | | 0 > | | > | acctSessionTime | mediumint(8) unsigned | YES | | NULL > | | > | acctInputOctets | bigint(20) unsigned | YES | | NULL > | | > | acctOutputOctets | bigint(20) unsigned | YES | | NULL > | | > | wisprBwMaxUp | int(10) unsigned | YES | | NULL > | | > | wisprBwMaxDown| int(10) unsigned | YES | | NULL > | | > | day | date | | PRI | -00-00 > | | > | acctMultiSessionId| varchar(27) | YES | | NULL > | | > +---+---+--+-+-- > ---+---+ > mysql> show index from acct; > +---++--+--+---+ > ---+-+--++--++-+ > | Table | Non_unique | Key_name | Seq_in_index | Column_name | > Collation | Cardinality | Sub_part | Packed | Null | Index_type | Comment | > +---++--+--+---+ > ---+-+--++--++-+ > | acct | 0 | PRIMARY |1 | user_id | A > | 53341 | NULL | NULL | | BTREE | | > | acct | 0 | PRIMARY |2 | nas_id| A > | 277871 | NULL | NULL | | BTREE | | > | acct | 0 | PRIMARY |3 | acctStatusType_id | A > | 558340 | NULL | NULL | | BTREE | | > | acct | 0 | PRIMARY |4 | acctSessionId | A > |59742411 | NULL | NULL | | BTREE | | > | acct | 0 | PRIMARY |5 | day | A > |59742411 | NULL | NULL | | BTREE | | > | acct | 1 | index1 |1 | can_id| A
Re: Simple questio SQL
select * from Products order by Visited desc limit 10; should give you the top 10 products. On 9/5/07, Tomas Abad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > HI All, > > > > I have a Table and want to know the most visited products. > > > > Products > > - Id > > - Name > > - Visited > > > > Visited is numeric. > > -- Thanks Alex http://alexlurthu.wordpress.com
Re: Delete query question
reply inline On 9/5/07, Olaf Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > delete from geno_260k where ident=(select ident from geno_260k where a1=0 > group by ident having count(a1)>25); When a sub query returns more than one row in a where clause, then "=" should be replaced by the "in" . -- Thanks Alex http://alexlurthu.wordpress.com
Re: recovering from 'disk full' mysql error
stop slave;
change master to master_log_file='Relay_Master_Log_File' ,
master_log_pos=Exec_master_log_pos;
#Get the values for the above command from your show slave status output.
start slave;
The above process should fix your problem.
On 9/4/07, Russell E Glaue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I had a disk full error on the master MySQL (4.1.22), which was
> replicating to a
> slave (4.1.22).
>
> My question is, how do I recover a slave replica when the master had a
> disk full
> error, space was freed, but the 'disk full' issue left a corrupted master
> binlog?
> 1) Do I have to reinitialize the slave from scratch,
> 2) or can I use some CLI tool to repair the damaged binlog (see below)
> 3) or can I skip to the next binlog
>
> This is assuming I performed a stop and start of the master mysql, then
> 'purge
> binary logs' from master.
> And would the resolution be the same if I did not start and stop the
> master mysql?
>
>
> According to bug 9949 (http://bugs.mysql.com/bug.php?id=9949) this was
> addressed
> in 4.1.9.
> I am running 4.1.22, and have experienced this issue as outlined.
>
> I am not finding a good sum of reasoning and process to proceed with
> resolving
> this type of predicament. Can anyone clue me in to resolving this?
>
>
> I purged enough binlogs to free up disk space on master, and then started
> the
> slave replica process on the slave.
>
> I get this famous error:
> -
> 070904 12:46:26 [Note] Slave I/O thread: connected to master
> '[EMAIL PROTECTED]:3306', replication started in log '
> master1-bin.54' at
> position 138164107
> 070904 12:46:26 [ERROR] Error reading packet from server: binlog truncated
> in
> the middle of event (server_errno=1236)
> 070904 12:46:26 [ERROR] Got fatal error 1236: 'binlog truncated in the
> middle of
> event' from master when reading data from binary log
> -
>
> I do a binlog dump on 'master1-bin.54', and I get the below error
> ('Error in
> log format or read error') at the end of the output:
>
> -
> #070904 11:46:22 server id 2 end_log_pos 137541177 Query
> thread_id=48871
> exec_time=0 error_code=0
> #070904 11:46:22 server id 2 end_log_pos 137655584 Query
> thread_id=48871
> exec_time=0 error_code=0
> #070904 11:46:22 server id 2 end_log_pos 137655719 Query
> thread_id=48773
> exec_time=0 error_code=0
> #070904 11:46:22 server id 2 end_log_pos 137770204 Query
> thread_id=48773
> exec_time=0 error_code=0
> #070904 11:46:24 server id 2 end_log_pos 137770339 Query
> thread_id=48870
> exec_time=0 error_code=0
> #070904 11:46:24 server id 2 end_log_pos 137962851 Query
> thread_id=48870
> exec_time=0 error_code=0
> #070904 11:46:24 server id 2 end_log_pos 137962986 Query
> thread_id=48871
> exec_time=0 error_code=0
> #070904 11:46:24 server id 2 end_log_pos 138152129 Query
> thread_id=48871
> exec_time=0 error_code=0
> #070904 11:46:24 server id 2 end_log_pos 138152264 Query
> thread_id=48773
> exec_time=0 error_code=0
> #070904 11:46:24 server id 2 end_log_pos 138163972 Query
> thread_id=48773
> exec_time=0 error_code=0
> #070904 11:46:24 server id 2 end_log_pos 138164107 Query
> thread_id=48870
> exec_time=0 error_code=0
> ERROR: Error in Log_event::read_log_event(): 'read error', data_len:
> 81904,
> event_type: 2
> Could not read entry at offset 138164107:Error in log format or read error
> -
>
>
> -RG
>
> --
> MySQL General Mailing List
> For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
> To unsubscribe:
> http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
--
Thanks
Alex
http://alexlurthu.wordpress.com
Re: Database page corruption on disk occurring during mysqldump on a fresh database
The checksum errors might be due to various reasons. We had similar issue where we restored the database multiple times, replaced the ram sticks nothing helped. Finally we drilled down the issue to the chassis. Recommend testing the restore on a different machine to rule out any hardware issue. -- Thanks Alex http://alexlurthu.wordpress.com On 9/5/07, Krishna Chandra Prajapati <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi > This might be happening due to two reasons; > 1 The system date might not be correct. > 2. Some things wrong with log postion (Incorrect log position) > > Regards, > Krishna Chandra Prajapati > > On 8/31/07, Maurice Volaski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > A 64-bit Gentoo Linux box had just been upgraded from MySQL 4.1 to > > 5.0.44 fresh (by dumping in 4.1 and restoring in 5.0.44) and almost > > immediately after that, during which time the database was not used, > > a crash occurred during a scripted mysqldump. So I restored and days > > later, it happened again. The crash details seem to be trying to > > suggest some other aspect of the operating system, even the memory or > > disk is flipping a bit. Or could I be running into a bug in this > > version of MySQL? > > > > Here's the output of the crash > > --- > > InnoDB: Database page corruption on disk or a failed > > InnoDB: file read of page 533. > > InnoDB: You may have to recover from a backup. > > 070827 3:10:04 InnoDB: Page dump in ascii and hex (16384 bytes): > > len 16384; hex > > > > [dump itself deleted for brevity] > > > > ;InnoDB: End of page dump > > 070827 3:10:04 InnoDB: Page checksum 646563254, > > prior-to-4.0.14-form checksum 2415947328 > > InnoDB: stored checksum 4187530870, prior-to-4.0.14-form stored > > checksum 2415947328 > > InnoDB: Page lsn 0 4409041, low 4 bytes of lsn at page end 4409041 > > InnoDB: Page number (if stored to page already) 533, > > InnoDB: space id (if created with >= MySQL-4.1.1 and stored already) 0 > > InnoDB: Page may be an index page where index id is 0 35 > > InnoDB: (index PRIMARY of table elegance/image) > > InnoDB: Database page corruption on disk or a failed > > InnoDB: file read of page 533. > > InnoDB: You may have to recover from a backup. > > InnoDB: It is also possible that your operating > > InnoDB: system has corrupted its own file cache > > InnoDB: and rebooting your computer removes the > > InnoDB: error. > > InnoDB: If the corrupt page is an index page > > InnoDB: you can also try to fix the corruption > > InnoDB: by dumping, dropping, and reimporting > > InnoDB: the corrupt table. You can use CHECK > > InnoDB: TABLE to scan your table for corruption. > > InnoDB: See also InnoDB: > > http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/forcing-recovery.html > > InnoDB: about forcing recovery. > > InnoDB: Ending processing because of a corrupt database page. > > > > -- > > > > Maurice Volaski, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Computing Support, Rose F. Kennedy Center > > Albert Einstein College of Medicine of Yeshiva University > > > > -- > > MySQL General Mailing List > > For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql > > To unsubscribe: > > http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > -- > Krishna Chandra Prajapati > MySQL DBA, > > Ed Ventures e-Learning Pvt. Ltd, > 201,202, Ashoka Bhoopal Chambers, > S P Road, Secunderabad 53. > Ph. No. - 040-39188771 > Url: www.ed-ventures-online.com >
Re: thread_concurrency in linux
I am not sure whether you are talking about innodb_thread_concurrency. If so please check out http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2006/06/05/innodb-thread-concurrency for more details. Innodb_thread_concurrency works on linux. Thanks Alex On 8/29/07, Andrew Braithwaite <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > Does anyone know if thread_concurrency works in linux or is it just > limited to Solaris and Windows? > > I know the general rule is number of CPU's*2 but will this actually have > any effect with Linux's threading model? > > Thanks for any help :) > > Andrew > > Mysql, query > > > This message has been scanned for viruses by BlackSpider MailControl - > www.blackspider.com > > -- > MySQL General Mailing List > For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql > To unsubscribe: > http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Thanks Alex http://blog.360.yahoo.com/alex.lurthu
Re: SCRIPT OR TOOL TO GIVE CHANGES IN DATABASES
If you want to track the schema level changes, updates, inserts etc you always have the binlogs/update logs. If you want to track select queries also you have the general query log. Check out http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/4.1/en/log-files.html for the different logs available. Of course be wary of the performance implications. -- Alex http://alexlurthu.wordpress.com/ On 8/29/07, Krishna Chandra Prajapati <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi All, > > Is there is any script or tool that generate the report and send an email > for changes done in the databases; > > There is any otherway (manual) So that i can look that what changes has > been > done in the database today. > > Regards, > Krishna >
Re: innodb engine status
To have a good understanding on the show innodb status output checkout http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2006/07/17/show-innodb-status-walk-through/ One area you can look at is the "LATEST DETECTED DEADLOCK". But in most cases have found calculations on the status variables more helpful. -- Alex http://alexlurthu.wordpress.com On 8/29/07, Ananda Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Friends, > > When i do "SHOW INNODB STATUS\G". It gives me details of transaction > happening on INNODB engine. > > Please let me know what all information i should consider from this output > to ensure if everything is fine or there are issue which i should address. > > I am using mysql version "5.0.41-community-log" > > regards > anandkl >
Re: [MySQL] Fastest way to Search from a Table
On 8/7/07, Tharabar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > SELECT `field1`,`field2`,`field3` FROM 'table' WHERE `field5` LIKE > '%keyword%1' AND `field5` LIKE '%keyword2%' The most trivial way to speedup a query is to add an index on the columns that are being used in the where clause. But doing 'LIKE' operation with the pattern beginning with '%' it renders the index use less. If you use MyISAM you can always use full text search on a text field for such use cases. -- Thanks Alex http://alexlurthu.wordpress.com
Re: MySQL database move
Hi Ace, If you cant affort downtime and if you are using innodb try removing auto extend on the current data file and create a datafile in a different partition and put autoextend on the same. If you are using MyISAM , you can move few tables to different disk use symlinks. -- Thanks Alex http://blog.360.yahoo.com/alex.lurthu On 7/9/07, Ananda Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Ace, Can't you zip or move old bin-logs to a different disk and release some free space on the current drive. regards anandkl On 7/9/07, Ace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > We have crisis. Disk with MySQL database is full. Now we want to move > database to another disk. How can we do it? > > -- > Thanks, > Rajan >
Re: bin-log position.
You will be taking a chance if you use Read_Master_Log_Pos: 106683511. It is not guaranteed that whatever is read from master is definitely applied. The apply of the read sqls might have stopped somewhere and in that case Read_Master_Log_Pos and exec_master_log_pos might be different. -- Thanks Alex http://blog.360.yahoo.com/alex.lurthu On 7/9/07, Ananda Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Alex, Thanks a lot, I missed on taking the "exe_master_log position" value. If i start from Read_Master_Log_Pos: 106683511, will it cause any harm. regards anandkl On 7/9/07, Alex Arul Lurthu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Anand, > > If the dump was taken from the slave then the binlog positions that were > dumped out are that of the slave. Now you might do 2 things : > > 1. Setup a slave of your master > >To do this use the binlog positions that you obtained using the > command show slave status on your slave. The master log file will be " > mysql-bin.29" . But your show slave output status doesnt show the > exe_master_log position. You need to use that position for setting up a new > slave of your master. > > 2. Setup a slave of your slave > > To do this use the binglog positions in your mysqldump output. > > P.S: Make sure you setup the hostnames in the change master command > appropriately. > > > -- > Thanks > Alex > http://blog.360.yahoo.com/alex.lurthu > > >
Re: bin-log position.
Anand, If the dump was taken from the slave then the binlog positions that were dumped out are that of the slave. Now you might do 2 things : 1. Setup a slave of your master To do this use the binlog positions that you obtained using the command show slave status on your slave. The master log file will be " mysql-bin.29" . But your show slave output status doesnt show the exe_master_log position. You need to use that position for setting up a new slave of your master. 2. Setup a slave of your slave To do this use the binglog positions in your mysqldump output. P.S: Make sure you setup the hostnames in the change master command appropriately. -- Thanks Alex http://blog.360.yahoo.com/alex.lurthu
Re: mysqldump on slave.
You havent mentioned which version of mysql your are on. If on an older version i would recommend the option --opt. Also if you are running a dump using single-transaction option on a loaded system with writes, things might slow down significantly due to different versions of rows which the server needs to maintain due to the dump. Thanks Alex On 7/6/07, Ananda Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi All, I am planning to take mysqldump on slave running innodb engine. I going to use the below command /usr/bin/mysqldump --user=root --password= --flush-logs --all-databases --master-data=2 --single-transaction > alldbdump.sql Before doing the mysqldump, should i stop the slave or the above command is enough, please let know, also please let me know if any other option i can use to speed up mysqldump. regards anandkl
Re: Performance problem MySQL 4.0.20
On 7/6/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: How does the cpu power influence the speed of a query? Sort is a cpu intensive process. *Check if you are suffering from locks on the tables you look up.* Also, was the table in the system where the queries are running faster rebuilt recently. You can try rebuilding the tables. How is the overrall system load on both machines. Is one overloaded than the other ? The machine which takes longer to excute the query might be busy serving some other process other than MySQL. Thanks Alex
Re: bin-log position.
On 7/6/07, Ananda Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: -- CHANGE MASTER TO MASTER_LOG_FILE='mysql-bin.03', MASTER_LOG_POS=311; As see in the mysqldump is saying to start recovery from bin-log file "' mysql-bin.03'" and position="MASTER_LOG_POS=311", You need to use the positions specified in the mysqldump since when u restore using the data, you will get data only till the snapshot specified in the dump. Thanks Alex
Re: Performance problem MySQL 4.0.20
On 7/6/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: How does the cpu power influence the speed of a query? Sort is a cpu intensive process. *Check if you are suffering from locks on the tables you look up.* Also, was the table in the system where the queries are running faster rebuilt recently. You can try rebuilding the tables. How is the overrall system load on both machines. Is one overloaded than the other ? The machine which takes longer to excute the query might be busy serving some other process other than MySQL. Thanks Alex
Re: Performance problem MySQL 4.0.20
Hi, Run explain plan on both the machines and post the same. ~Alex On 7/4/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello Ananda, yes, the testmachine has the same data. Regards, Spiker -- GMX FreeMail: 1 GB Postfach, 5 E-Mail-Adressen, 10 Free SMS. Alle Infos und kostenlose Anmeldung: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/freemail -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Cannot Connect: Can't create a new thread (errno 11)
Chris, Did you check if there are any user level MAX_USER_CONNECTIONS restriction set while granting access ? Thanks Alex On 7/4/07, Chris Faust <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Folks, I'm wondering is someone could help us in trying to resolve the above error, we have read through what threads we could find and tried all the suggestions, but have had no luck. There are no memory problems, in fact when this happens if there is still a localhost client connection to the server you can do whatever you want, everything is running normal. It just refuses all new connections. When it happens there is plenty of memory on the machine and no load at all (everything is running just as it should). Once things fall below 90, everything comes back. The problem happens when the process list hits the 91st process every time. 90 processes, no problems, the 91st process/connection gets the above error and any after that simple gets "Can't connect to MySQL server". We've tried all the obvious things, messing with the number of connections, open files etc. Nothing seems to work. We are running MySQL 5 on Centos 5 (flavor of RedHat). The machine is dedicated to MySQL. Below is a link to a text file that shows the OS limits for the mysql account on the machine and the output from show variables (including it made the message to large for the list). http://208.3.90.212/wtresults.txt If anyone has any suggestions, it would be appreciated. Thanks!
Re: Blob data
Ratheesh, If you still want to place you blob data in the database, seperate out the blob storage to a seperate table. This will help you alleviate few of your performance and maintenance problems. ~Alex On 6/22/07, Steve Edberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: At 12:11 PM +0530 6/22/07, Ratheesh K J wrote: >Hello All, > >I want a clarification. Whe run a forum wherein people send messages >with/without attachments. Attachments may contain images, documents >etc.. We are actually storing the attachment in a blob column. >Sometimes the attachments are big. And today the table size has >grown to 40 GB. This has created a headache for any maintanance >task, backup, restoration. etc. > >I want to know whether this is the right approach. Or should we >actually store the attachments in directories and just stiore the >attachment path in the database. > >Kindly suggest the best approach so that I can reduce the database size. > >Thanks in advance Yes, storing files - especially non-textual files - in the file system instead of the database is generally considered the best practice. At one point I had created a document management system that stored everything in the database as you are doing; my rationale was that it allowed me to manage permissions using the existing database permissions, and to back up the whole database using mysqldump, vs mysqldump + doing a tar of the files. However, I abandoned this approach for the following reasons: (1) Storing non-plaintext items (eg; pictures) in the database makes it bigger and slower without added value - you can't (at least not yet, or in the foreseeable future) do a meaningful search on a blob. (2) It becomes more difficult to split storage out onto multiple filesystems; eg, leaving the database files in /var/database, putting the documents themselves into /home/docmanager, etc. (3) It makes queries on the commandline unwieldy; if you have a blob field, doing a select * to check a record's contents can dump a lot of garbage on the screen. (4) It can make doing incremental backups more difficult; if the documents themselves are relatively static, but the document metadata stored in the database is very dynamic, it becomes simple to do a compact daily database dump + a weekly document directory backup (for example) if the files are not in the database. What I do is create a unique SHA1 hash when a file is uploaded (eg; sha1(rand()). The original filename and the 40-character hash are stored in the database, and the document is stored in the filesystem using the hash as the filename. I can optionally compress and encrypt the document as well, storing the encryption key in the database. This gives (for me) adequate document security. An additional advantage is that you can take advantage of the filesystem tree if you have a large number of documents. For example, if a document hash is 'f0118e9bd2c4fb29c64ee03abce698b8', you can store the file in the directory tree f0/11/8e/f0118e9bd2c4fb29c64ee03abce698b8 (extending to as many levels as you feel necessary). By keeping the number of files per directory fairly small, file retrieval becomes relatively fast. As the hashes approximate a random distribution, you should always have a close-to-balanced tree. Lastly, I store a hash of the document itself in the database as well. This allows me to detect if duplicate files are uploaded, and to determine if a previously-uploaded file has been corrupted in some way. steve -- +--- my people are the people of the dessert, ---+ | Steve Edberghttp://pgfsun.ucdavis.edu/ | | UC Davis Genome Center[EMAIL PROTECTED] | | Bioinformatics programming/database/sysadmin (530)754-9127 | + said t e lawrence, picking up his fork + -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Memory Problems
On 5/15/07, Micah Stevens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I think you may be able to get around this by using multiple key buffers? (MySQL 4.1 or later) key buffers caches only index data and they dont help with sorting like sort_buffer. they dont impact innodb engine. even while using multiple key buffers, the memory allocated will belong to the same process and the limitation is at the process level. ~Alex
Re: backup solution.
On 5/15/07, Ananda Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Alex, Thanks for the info, For the second question, do you mean i should restore the entire backup or just that one file from my backup. All the files should be from the same backup. AFAIK, MySQL doesnt have an option to recover only one datafile. Hence restore the entire backup. ~Alex
Re: Memory Problems
On 5/15/07, Christoph Klünter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I have set the sort_buffer_size to 1G but even this doesn't help. Any hints ? Should we try a 64Bit-OS ? setting sort_buffer_size to 1GB is not recommended. it is a thread specific configuration parameter which means each thread will be eligible to get a sort_buffer_size of 1GB. On a 32 bit system, you can push to a approx 3.2 GB usage for the database by doing kernel level hacks mentioned at http://www.puschitz.com/TuningLinuxForOracle.shtml#GrowingTheOracleSGATo2.7GBInx86RHEL2.1WithoutVLMor by using VLM also. But if you are using a mysql 32bit build, then you will not be able to use more than 4GB theoretically. Using 64bit OS and 64bit build of mysql will enable you to use memory greater than 4GB effectively. ~Alex
Re: backup solution.
On 5/15/07, Ananda Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi All, I have take a mysqldump of my entire database, is it possible to restore just one table from this mysqldump. Yes thats possible. cat | grep "tablename u want to restore" > mysql -u user -ppassword should do it. Also, i have taken binary backup of my database, and one of the datafile is corrupt, is it possible to restore just this file from backup and start the mysqldb. Mysql database is running in innodb engine. If all files are from the same cold binary backup, then you will be able to do a restore. Else it will be highly unlikely. ~Alex
Re: Redo logs take to much disk space
the ask lies in expire_logs_days. If you set this to optimal number of days, logs older than the configured days will get purged. ~Alex On 5/15/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > One question about this, is it safe to turn of log_bin? i think, you can. the log is necessary for data replication and sometimes for data recovery. you can read about it here: http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/binary-log.html > Or can you tweak it somehow so that it won't' take some much disk space? you can bzip old logs if you need them but don't want them to take so much space :) -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: replication
check if you are seeing any access denied errors in the mysql error log. ~Alex On 5/14/07, richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Ian P. Christian wrote: > richard wrote: > >> as far as I can see, these commands select which db's to replicate on >> the slave that currently exist on the master server. >> What i am asking is, if I set a server up as a slave, can I have other >> databases on the slave that are not part of the replication system? >> > > Yes - I've been doing this for some time, works fine. > > > mmm, ok. I've set replication up and have show master and show slave output displaying the following. Any updates I make to the master are not transferred to the slave. The log position increases on the master but doesn't change on the slave. Any ideas? cheers Rich mysql> show master status \G *** 1. row *** File: bla-bin.004 Position: 681 Binlog_do_db: foo_db Binlog_ignore_db: 1 row in set (0.00 sec) mysql> show slave status \G *** 1. row *** Slave_IO_State: Checking master version Master_Host: 192.168.1.110 Master_User: slave_user Master_Port: 3306 Connect_Retry: 60 Master_Log_File: bla-bin.004 Read_Master_Log_Pos: 512 Relay_Log_File: db_box-relay-bin.01 Relay_Log_Pos: 4 Relay_Master_Log_File: bla-bin.004 Slave_IO_Running: Yes Slave_SQL_Running: Yes Replicate_Do_DB: foo_db Replicate_Ignore_DB: Replicate_Do_Table: Replicate_Ignore_Table: Replicate_Wild_Do_Table: Replicate_Wild_Ignore_Table: Last_Errno: 0 Last_Error: Skip_Counter: 0 Exec_Master_Log_Pos: 512 Relay_Log_Space: 4 Until_Condition: None Until_Log_File: Until_Log_Pos: 0 Master_SSL_Allowed: No Master_SSL_CA_File: Master_SSL_CA_Path: Master_SSL_Cert: Master_SSL_Cipher: Master_SSL_Key: Seconds_Behind_Master: 0 1 row in set (0.00 sec) -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: replication
techincally yes you can have. replication is all about the queries that are getting executed on the master will be executed on the slave. So , if the database that exists on the master exists on the slave , then you should have no problems. Thanks Alex On 5/14/07, richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: as far as I can see, these commands select which db's to replicate on the slave that currently exist on the master server. What i am asking is, if I set a server up as a slave, can I have other databases on the slave that are not part of the replication system? MySQL 中文网 wrote: > > of course > > setup by the option replication-do-db or replication-ignore-db :) > > richard wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I have a server (master version 4.0.1) that has a database that I >> want to replicate on another server (slave version 4.1.20). >> The slave already has another db on it. Is is possible to have a >> mixture of replicated and non replicated dbs running on a slave? >> >> cheers >> Rich >> >> > > -- > > > > > > > > ** > MySQL 中文网 > 叶金荣 MySQL独立咨询师、系统架构师、培训师 > > 业务: LAMP架构设计、解决方案、负载均衡，MySQL 技术咨询、培训、支持 > 手机：13466608698 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (或 [EMAIL PROTECTED]) > 网址：http://imysql.cn > ** > http://imysql.cn 为用户提供一个专业的、自由的MySQL中文交流社区，欢迎来访 > > 给你的祝福,要让你招架不住! > > 2007/05/14 17:50:01 > -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mysqldump Files
On a different note just running a slave will not help when there is some accidental deletion of data or tables or databases. Hence have a slave as Mikhail mentioned and also run regular backups on the slave. Preferably a tar of your mysql server after shutting it down, also ensure you have log-bin and log-slave-updates enabled on your slave. Push the tar to more than one location and hosts so that you can survive disk corruptions. This way you can ensure you can recover from most possible database corruption scenarios. Thanks Alex On 1/30/07, Mikhail Berman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi David, Is the space on hard-drive is major concern of yours or abilities to recover from crash is? Backups are usually taking to be able to recover from a crash. Which in its turn means if there is a way to recover faster it is better. Having slave that is constantly updated gives you very quick way of recovering if master goes down. Just point you PHP scripts to slave and be happy. If you need additional back up, do them from "full" slave. Stop it for a while, do backups and then restart slave again. For huge backups in our office we use old, and I mean old, Dells with huge 500GB drives running one of *Nix's Regards, Mikhail Berman -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 3:27 PM To: Mikhail Berman Cc: mysql Subject: RE: Mysqldump Files Hi Mikhail, I don't think that would save much space, in terms of file size. The tables that are actively getting inserts are large and growing larger (~750,000 records), and those that have no activity are either currently empty or have less than a hundred records in them. So just dumping the active tables will comprise I'd guess 99% or more of the database size. David -- Hi David, Let me point you in a bit different direction. You are already running replication as it seems from your E-mail So, why not just run chained replication from second to the third server and use "replicate-do-table = [table_name]" in my.cnf of the third server to limit selection of tables to be used by web server. Or do full replication to another server from the first one for full backup? Regards, Mikhail Berman -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 2:33 PM To: mysql Subject: Mysqldump Files Howdy Guys and Gals, We are acquiring data on background radiation in a master-slave server environment (RH9.0, MySQL 4.0.24) at the rate of approximately 19,000 records per day. The data are insert-only into about 25 of 31 tables in the database -- no updates are ever applied to the data. Information from the database is used via select statements for graphical display and report generation amongst other uses. A PHP backup script using mysqldump runs as a cron job each night from a third server which also functions as an intranet webserver. After 1 1/2 years of operation, the mysqldump file of the entire database is roughly 760 MB, and this takes under 2 minutes to create. Once bzipped and tarred, the entire file is 31.7 MB in size, and this part of the backup process now takes 46-47 minutes. The rate of acquisition of data will be fairly constant, and up to 3 years of data will be kept on the live master-slave, so simply doubling all these values seems a realistic expectation for a full backup of the database after 3 years. Data older than 3 years would be deleted from the master-slave system. How long it would be reasonable to keep doing a full dump of the database versus using mysqldump with a where clause, i.e., doing a daily incremental backup, say of the last 24 hours. Also, what are the key mysqldump and/or server variables to pay attention to in order to process these large, maybe multi-gigabyte dump files? Thanks, David -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
