utf8_polish_ci
Hello, I'm using MySQL 4.1.2 and it should be available utf8_polish_ci collation. But, it seems that it is not. # Query: # SHOW COLLATION LIKE 'utf%' # 'Collation''Charset','Id','Default','Compiled','Sortlen' 'utf8_general_ci','utf8','33','Yes','Yes','1' 'utf8_bin','utf8','83','','Yes','1' The same results are for windows and linux. Is this a bug ? ML -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
When 4.1.2 release
In the documentation there is a note that 4.1.2 will be released soon. I need some features which are available only in this version... Any estimated date when it will be ? Sorry for asking about the same thing... ML -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
UTF-8 problem
Hello, I've just installed 4.1.1 to see how UTF-8 is working. In my.ini I have set default-character-set=utf8 - so all input/output data should be send in utf-8 charset. System variables (after start) are set as they should: character_set_serverutf8 character_set_systemutf8 character_set_database utf8 character_set_clientutf8 character_set_connectionutf8 character_set_results utf8 collation_connectionutf8_general_ci collation_database utf8_general_ci collation_serverutf8_general_ci And now, php function mysqli_character_set_name return latin1_swedish_ci and all queries are returned in this character-set. Queries are working only when I set connection character-set: mysqli_query($c, SET CHARACTER SET utf8;); mysqli_query($c, SELECT * FROM db); What I should change to have all in/out queries executed in utf8 and utf8_general_ci collation. Thanks in advance. ML -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
when 4.1.2 release
Hello, when do you plan to release 4.1.2 version ? -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
When release of 4.1.1
Can you tell us, when you plan to release 4.1.1 version ? A few weeks ago, Heikki guess was: ...before Nov 15th, 2003. And how it looks now ? Best regards, ML -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Referential integrity, FULLTEXT and table types
I need to have a table that supports FULLTEXT searches. This implies that this table should be a MyISAM table. However, I also require that this table act as a parent for child tables in order to support referential integrity. If I create the child tables as INNODB tables, will referential integrity still work with the MyISAM parent table? Hello Tom, Currently you can't use InnoDB tables and Full-Text search, also you can't use MyISAM (which support Full-Text) with foreign keys (it's planned to implement foreign keys in MyISAM tables in MySQL 5.0). So my suggestion: use InnoDB MyISAM together - maybe it isn't referential safe but what can we do... Good luck, Marek -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
LEFT JOIN limitations ??
Hello, I have a strange problem, maybe some of you will be able to explain me something. I use LEFT JOIN as a substitute for subselects. It's true that many subselects can be rewriten using LEFT JOIN. I have made a query which use LEFT JOIN statement and... when there are many LEFT JOIN's (over 3) on the same table MySQL execute this query very long time... few hours or more. Maybe there is something wrong with my table structures... Are there any limitations for LEFT JOIN ?? Below the query, and table structures... -- QUERY SELECT DISTINCT _NEW.news_id, _NNA.title, IF(LENGTH(_NNA.content) 250, CONCAT(SUBSTRING(_NNA.content, 1, 250),'...'), _NNA.content) AS content, _NEW.publish_date FROM new_news _NEW, new_news_names_search _NNA LEFT JOIN new_news_categorys _CAT21 ON _CAT21.news_id = _NEW.news_id AND _CAT21.category_id IN (21) LEFT JOIN new_news_categorys _CAT18 ON _CAT18.news_id = _NEW.news_id AND _CAT18.category_id IN (18) LEFT JOIN new_news_categorys _CAT50 ON _CAT50.news_id = _NEW.news_id AND _CAT50.category_id IN (50) LEFT JOIN new_news_categorys _CAT1 ON _CAT1.news_id = _NEW.news_id AND _CAT1.category_id IN (1,2,3,17,19,30,37) WHERE _NEW.publish_date = NOW() AND _NNA.news_id = _NEW.news_id AND _NNA.language_id = '1' AND _CAT21.news_id 0 AND _CAT18.news_id 0 AND _CAT50.news_id 0 AND _CAT1.news_id 0 ORDER BY _NEW.publish_date DESC # # Table structure for table 'new_news_categorys' # CREATE TABLE new_news_categorys ( news_id int(10) NOT NULL default '0', category_id int(10) NOT NULL default '0', PRIMARY KEY (news_id,category_id), KEY category_id (category_id), CONSTRAINT 0_1901 FOREIGN KEY (news_id) REFERENCES new_news (news_id) ON DELETE CASCADE, CONSTRAINT 0_1902 FOREIGN KEY (category_id) REFERENCES set_new_news_categorys (category_id) ON DELETE CASCADE ) TYPE=InnoDB; # # Table structure for table 'new_news_names' # CREATE TABLE new_news_names ( news_id int(10) NOT NULL default '0', language_id int(10) NOT NULL default '0', title longtext, content longtext, PRIMARY KEY (news_id,language_id), KEY news_id (news_id), KEY language_id (language_id), CONSTRAINT 0_1909 FOREIGN KEY (news_id) REFERENCES new_news (news_id) ON DELETE CASCADE ) TYPE=InnoDB; # # Table structure for table 'new_news_names_search' # CREATE TABLE new_news_names_search ( news_id int(11) NOT NULL default '0', language_id int(11) NOT NULL default '0', title longtext, content longtext, PRIMARY KEY (news_id,language_id), FULLTEXT KEY title (title,content) ) TYPE=MyISAM; -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
MySQL tables performance question
Hello, I have a table where misc data are stored. Right now this table has about 30 columns, but for sure it will be more in the near future. So I wonder how the big number (50-100) of table's columns affect for MySQL DB performance. Maybe it's better to create more tables rather than more table's columns ?? Marek Lewczuk -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Full-Text for InnoDB Unicode
As far I remember full-text doesn't work with utf-8. Anybody knows the estimated time when it will be supported ?? I next few months 4.1 version will be ready to use (I hope so...) and I wish to use utf-8 charsets, but very important issue is full-text search. I'm also curious with InnoDB support for Full-Text search. Best regards, Marek -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Set variable ft_min_word_len
On our Linux server we get this error: 030722 08:09:55 mysqld started /usr/local/mysql/bin/mysqld: ERROR: unknown variable 'ft_min_word_len = 2' 030722 08:09:55 mysqld ended [...] It's strange becouse I can set this variable through my.ini on my Windows. Anyone can help me solve this problem ? -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Set variable ft_min_word_len
At 8:20 +0100 7/22/03, Marek Lewczuk wrote: On our Linux server we get this error: 030722 08:09:55 mysqld started /usr/local/mysql/bin/mysqld: ERROR: unknown variable 'ft_min_word_len = 2' 030722 08:09:55 mysqld ended [...] It's strange becouse I can set this variable through my.ini on my Windows. Anyone can help me solve this problem ? What version is MySQL on your Linux box? Older than 4.0.x? First we were using 4.0.12, but today we have made an update to 4.0.13 - but on both versions it's not working. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Set variable ft_min_word_len
the correct syntax is WITHOUT quotes and WITHOUT spaces. --ft_min_word_len=2 or -O ft_min_word_len=2 -- but -O is obsolete but not -O 'ft_min_word_len = 2' But we want to set this variable in my.cnf, so the syntax shouldn't be like this: set-variable = ft_min_word_len=2 ?? -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Building from the develepment tree (windows)
I'm trying to build mysql from the development sources of mysql 4.1., retreived using bitkeeper under win2k using cygwin. I have made bk -r edit, and now I'm having a problem running aclocal: aclocal: configure.in: 450: macro `AM_PROG_AS' not found in library When I make automake --version and aclocal --version it prints me 1.4-p5. Does anyone use cygwin for this, any solutions and advices ? Best regards, Marek L. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
MySQL vs. PostgreSQL -- speed test
Hello group, For everyone who thinks about moving from MySQL to PostgreSQL I have a realy bad news - It's not worth. Why, You may ask... A few days ago I have installed and tested PostgreSQL, becouse I realy need UTF-8 support and subselects. I thought that PostgreSQL will be as good as MySQL but also will give me that features, which aren't availble in MySQL. Well, after installation and moving my MySQL dbs into PostgreSQL I decided to check if PostgreSQL is as fast as MySQL is. I was shocked... I have made several tests with simple and complicated querys - select, update, insert, drop. PostgreSQL execute those querys even 20 times slower than MySQL. On average, PostgreSQL is 2-3 times slower. So, all people who needs trigers/views/procedures etc. have to be patient and wait for new MySQL versions. ML. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MySQL vs. PostgreSQL -- speed test
If maximum speed is critical. It's easy to lose sight of the fact that speed is not the only criterion in choosing a DBMS. Features, stability, security, and so on can be just as important or more so. No single DBMS is going to win all the prizes; the trick is to find the one with the right balance. I agree with your opinion in 100%, but in my case I need DBMS with features like subselectes/utf-8/stored procedures but the speed is also very important issue. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MySQL vs. PostgreSQL -- speed test
which PostgreSQL version have you testet? If you want compare MySQL and PostgreSQL, than you have to use InnoDB tables. Tests with MyISAM make no sense. Out J2EE Application is working woth PostgreSQL 7.3.3 and MySQL 4.0.13 with InnoDB tables (we need transactions and referencial integrity). and the performance is at moment the same. But we have unoptimized PostgreSQL version. I was testing MySQL 4.0.13 with InnoDB tables and PostgreSQL 7.3.3. Rafal -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MySQL vs. PostgreSQL -- speed test
I agree with your opinion in 100%, but in my case I need DBMS with features like subselectes/utf-8/stored procedures but the speed is also very important issue. You might have to spend money! You are saying that there is DBMS with all this features and it is as fast as MySQL ? -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Utf-8 in 4.1
Hello, 4.1 version can use UTF-8 encoding, but as far I remember there is something wrong with this feature. Can you tell us when 4.1.1 version will be released and is it will be fixed. Best regards, Marek -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
InnoDB: no full text search alternative solution ??
Hello, As you all know InnoDB doesn't support full text search. My application is a huge news system with about 100 new news per day. All of my tables are in InnoDB becouse of foreign keys. Today I find out that the main feature of news system - searching - is not available. It's quite big problem... Do you have any ideas how to search text tables in InnoDB ?? Of course I know about querys using LIKE = '%%' but it isn't so effective and good as FULL TEXT... Maybe in further versions (4.1) of MySQL, InnoDB will support this feature ?? Thanks for answer. - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Problem with unique index on InnoDB
Hello group, My table look like this: CREATE TABLE `mda_models` ( `model_id` int(10) NOT NULL auto_increment, `make_id` int(10) NOT NULL default '0', `model_name` varchar(100) NOT NULL default '', `model_phase` varchar(100) default NULL, `model_phase_no` int(4) default NULL, `model_manufacturer_name` text, `model_type` int(10) NOT NULL default '0', `model_wage` int(4) default NULL, `update_date` datetime NOT NULL default '-00-00 00:00:00', `update_user_id` int(10) NOT NULL default '0', `add_date` date NOT NULL default '-00-00', `pricelist_start_date` date NOT NULL default '-00-00', `pricelist_end_date` date NOT NULL default '-12-31', `sales_end_date` date NOT NULL default '-12-31', PRIMARY KEY (`model_id`,`make_id`), UNIQUE KEY `model` (`model_name`,`model_phase`,`model_phase_no`,`model_type`,`make_id`), KEY `make_id` (`make_id`), KEY `model_id` (`model_id`), KEY `model_type` (`model_type`), FOREIGN KEY (`make_id`) REFERENCES `mda_makes` (`make_id`), FOREIGN KEY (`model_type`) REFERENCES `set_mda_car_types` (`type_id`) ) TYPE=InnoDB As you see there is the unique key called model. There are several fields, some of them can be null.. Look at this insert querys: INSERT INTO mda_models (make_id, model_name, model_phase, model_phase_no, model_type) VALUES (42, 'Test model', NULL, NULL, 1); INSERT INTO mda_models (make_id, model_name, model_phase, model_phase_no, model_type) VALUES (42, 'Test model', NULL, NULL, 1); MySQL should send an error before second query, that there is the record which is the same as the inserting one... But NO, you can add as many as you want... Is this a bug or I'm doing something wrong. I would be appreciated for help!! Marek Lewczuk POLAND - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
RE: Problem with unique index on InnoDB
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Harald Fuchs Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 10:52 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Problem with unique index on InnoDB The second record is different because it has another model_id. BTW: your index on model_id is useless because it's covered by your primary key. Yes, correct... Primary key is based on model_id, and model_id field is set as autoincrement. But there is also unique index called model, and there is no model_id field inside... So mysql should not add two same records... In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Marek Lewczuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hello group, My table look like this: CREATE TABLE `mda_models` ( `model_id` int(10) NOT NULL auto_increment, `make_id` int(10) NOT NULL default '0', `model_name` varchar(100) NOT NULL default '', `model_phase` varchar(100) default NULL, `model_phase_no` int(4) default NULL, `model_manufacturer_name` text, `model_type` int(10) NOT NULL default '0', `model_wage` int(4) default NULL, `update_date` datetime NOT NULL default '-00-00 00:00:00', `update_user_id` int(10) NOT NULL default '0', `add_date` date NOT NULL default '-00-00', `pricelist_start_date` date NOT NULL default '-00-00', `pricelist_end_date` date NOT NULL default '-12-31', `sales_end_date` date NOT NULL default '-12-31', PRIMARY KEY (`model_id`,`make_id`), UNIQUE KEY `model` (`model_name`,`model_phase`,`model_phase_no`,`model_type`,`make_id`), KEY `make_id` (`make_id`), KEY `model_id` (`model_id`), KEY `model_type` (`model_type`), FOREIGN KEY (`make_id`) REFERENCES `mda_makes` (`make_id`), FOREIGN KEY (`model_type`) REFERENCES `set_mda_car_types` (`type_id`) ) TYPE=InnoDB As you see there is the unique key called model. There are several fields, some of them can be null.. Look at this insert querys: INSERT INTO mda_models (make_id, model_name, model_phase, model_phase_no, model_type) VALUES (42, 'Test model', NULL, NULL, 1); INSERT INTO mda_models (make_id, model_name, model_phase, model_phase_no, model_type) VALUES (42, 'Test model', NULL, NULL, 1); MySQL should send an error before second query, that there is the record which is the same as the inserting one... But NO, you can add as many as you want... Is this a bug or I'm doing something wrong. - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
