Re: MySQL version 3.23 to 5.x features
wow it really helped me a lot. I really thank Shawn,Dale Jesper for there inputs On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 7:13 PM, shawn green wrote: > Hello Naga, > > > On 8/21/2013 6:45 AM, Nagaraj S wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> Can anyone share the features/comparison from MySQL version 3.23 to 5.x in >> single document? I can get from Google, however I have to navigate >> different pages/sites, if it is in single document that will be useful to >> see the overview of mysql features >> >> > While not exactly just one single page for all changes, there is a single > page of the fine manual within each new major version that describes the > big features that are new or changed within that version. > > http://dev.mysql.com/doc/**refman/5.0/en/mysql-nutshell.**html<http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/mysql-nutshell.html> > http://dev.mysql.com/doc/**refman/5.1/en/mysql-nutshell.**html<http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/mysql-nutshell.html> > http://dev.mysql.com/doc/**refman/5.5/en/mysql-nutshell.**html<http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.5/en/mysql-nutshell.html> > http://dev.mysql.com/doc/**refman/5.6/en/mysql-nutshell.**html<http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.6/en/mysql-nutshell.html> > > Unfortunately, to learn what we changed between 3.23 -> 4.0 or between 4.0 > -> 4.1, you are going to need to review the change logs > http://dev.mysql.com/doc/**refman/4.1/en/news.html<http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/4.1/en/news.html> > > > from > http://dev.mysql.com/doc/**refman/4.1/en/index.html<http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/4.1/en/index.html> > > This manual describes features that are not included in every edition of > MySQL 3.23, MySQL 4.0, and MySQL 4.1; such features may not be included in > the edition of MySQL 3.23, MySQL 4.0, or MySQL 4.1; licensed to you. > > > > I can pretty much summarize the deficiencies in 3.23 like this > * No InnoDB, Archive, CSV, Federated, or Blackhole storage engines > * No table partitioning > * No Views > * No Stored Procedures or Stored Functions > * No Triggers > * No Events > * Severe scalability limits (won't run as fast with reasonably concurrent > loads even on great hardware as later versions) > * Completely out of print (unpublished) and unsupported. > * Missing literally thousands of bug fixes and performance improvements > > > Any new project should be starting out with 5.6. Any production server > should be on 5.5 or 5.6 by now or migrating soon. It is also a fairly safe > bet that if you are still operating a 3.23 instance of MySQL that it is > also time to upgrade your hardware. > > Regards, > -- > Shawn Green > MySQL Principal Technical Support Engineer > Oracle USA, Inc. - Hardware and Software, Engineered to Work Together. > Office: Blountville, TN > > -- > MySQL General Mailing List > For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql > To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql > >
MySQL version 3.23 to 5.x features
Hello, Can anyone share the features/comparison from MySQL version 3.23 to 5.x in single document? I can get from Google, however I have to navigate different pages/sites, if it is in single document that will be useful to see the overview of mysql features -Naga
Re: Replication Error on Slave
All, Thanks for your replies and as per the advise I switched to row-based replication but replication ended with below error. *Last_Error: Error 'Table 'b.sdefrent' doesn't exist' on query. Default database: 'b. Query: 'drop table sdefrent'* above error is due to non existence of database and table. However bit confused on the error I got, if its row based replication why its taking as statement. Please help me here. Thank you -Naga On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Johan De Meersman wrote: > On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 10:40 AM, Nagaraj S wrote: > >> **On Slave Server I replicate database *A alone* and my replication not >> working due to data fetching happen on B database. >> > > Well, yes. Statement-based replication does what it says on the box: it > executes the exact same statement on the slave. If database B is not there, > then insert into A select from B will not work. > > You may switch to row-based replication (which of course has it's own > caveats, see the online manuals); or you can simply choose to also replicate > database B. > > > > -- > Bier met grenadyn > Is als mosterd by den wyn > Sy die't drinkt, is eene kwezel > Hy die't drinkt, is ras een ezel >
Replication Error on Slave
I have setup mysql replication with below scenario **On master server I have two databases *A and B*. App team use database B temporarily for there application to compute calculation and insert the values on A database. **On Slave Server I replicate database *A alone* and my replication not working due to data fetching happen on B database. Kindly help me out to resolve this issue. -Naga
Re: Slave is not updated
who is 'adconsent' ??. what is your replication user -naga On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 3:01 PM, Jeetendra Ranjan < jeetendra.ran...@sampatti.com> wrote: > Here is the action i performed: > > mysql> GRANT REPLICATION SLAVE, REPLICATION CLIENT ON *.* TO > 'xx'@'xx.xx.xx.xx' > IDENTIFIED BY ''; > Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.00 sec) > > mysql> Flush privileges; > Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.00 sec) > > mysql> select * from mysql.user where user='adconsent' \G; > *** 1. row *** >Host: xx.xx.xx.xx >User: xxx >Password: *02BF3AAD3EDAAD0A1C45A98092B24BDC96172E16 > Select_priv: N > Insert_priv: N > Update_priv: N > Delete_priv: N > Create_priv: N > Drop_priv: N > Reload_priv: N > Shutdown_priv: N >Process_priv: N > File_priv: N > Grant_priv: N > References_priv: N > Index_priv: N > Alter_priv: N >Show_db_priv: N > Super_priv: N > Create_tmp_table_priv: N >Lock_tables_priv: N >Execute_priv: N > Repl_slave_priv: Y >Repl_client_priv: Y >Create_view_priv: N > Show_view_priv: N > Create_routine_priv: N > Alter_routine_priv: N >Create_user_priv: N > Event_priv: N >Trigger_priv: N >ssl_type: > ssl_cipher: > x509_issuer: >x509_subject: > max_questions: 0 > max_updates: 0 > max_connections: 0 > max_user_connections: 0 > 1 row in set (0.00 sec) > > > mysql> show slave status \G; > *** 1. row *** >Slave_IO_State: Connecting to master > Master_Host: xx.xx.xx.xx. > Master_User: x > > Master_Port: 3306 > Connect_Retry: 60 > Master_Log_File: ip-xxx-xxx-xxx-xx-bin.42 > Read_Master_Log_Pos: 7220 >Relay_Log_File: ip-xx-xx-xx-xx-relay-bin.01 > Relay_Log_Pos: 98 > Relay_Master_Log_File: ip-xxx-xxx-xxx-xx-bin.42 > Slave_IO_Running: No > Slave_SQL_Running: Yes > > Replicate_Do_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: 7220 > > Relay_Log_Space: 98 > 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: NULL > > > Thanks > Jeetendra Ranjan > - Original Message - From: "Shanmugam, Dhandapani" < > dhandapani.shanmu...@eds.com> > To: "Parikh, Dilip Kumar" ; "Jeetendra Ranjan" > ; > Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2009 2:47 PM > > Subject: RE: Slave is not updated > > > >> by the way did you flush the privileges on the master? What is the >> output you get, when you log in as root user on the mysql master server >> and issue the below command: >> >> select * from mysql.user where user='replication'\G; >> >> -D >> >> -Original Message- >> From: Parikh, Dilip Kumar [mailto:dilipkumar.par...@eds.com] >> Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2009 2:43 PM >> To: Jeetendra Ranjan; mysql@lists.mysql.com >> Subject: RE: Slave is not updated >> >> You can see in the logs, access denied So give trying for hostname or >> with full domain or >> >> Grant replication slave on *.* to 'mysqladm'@'95.%' identified by >> 'xx'; Grant replication slave on *.* to 'mysqladm'@'hostname >> identified by 'xx'; Flush privileges; >> >> it should work. >> >> Thanks, >> Dilipkumar >> Database Engineering >> mailto: dilipkumar.par...@eds.com >> Pager mail:9884430...@nma.vodafone.in >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: Jeetendra Ranjan [mailto:jeetendra.ran...@sampatti.com] >> Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2009 2:31 PM >> To: Shanmugam, Dhandapani; Parikh, Dilip Kumar; mysql@lists.mysql.com >> Subject: Re: Slave is not updated >> >> 091223 5:55:22 [Note] Slave SQL thread initialized, starting >> replication in >> log 'FIRST' at position 0, relay log >> '/var/lib/mysql/mysql-relay-bin.01' >> position: 4 >> 091223 5:55:22 [ERROR] Slave I/O thread: error connecting to master >> 'r...@201.107.236.77:3306': Error: 'Access denied for user >> 'root'@'ip-97-74-85-42.ip.secureserver.net' (using password: YES)' >> errno: >> 1045 retry-time: 60 retries: 86400 >> 091223 6:55:42 [Note] /usr/sbin/mysqld: Normal shutdown >> >> 091223 6:55:42 [Note] Slave I/O thread killed while connecting to >> master >> 091223 6:55:42 [Note] Slave I/O thread exiting, read up to log 'FIRST', >> >> position 4 >> 091223 6:55:42 [Note] Error reading relay log ev
Patch for mysql
Hi Gurus, Good Day! How to apply mysql bug fixing patches or it is just updating or replacing some code in a c file and recompiling the source? Anyone able to supply some simple steps to patch instructions? I have mysql server running on Solaris 10 system. Thanks. Naga..
Re: Fwd: Why dont my query use the index keys?
Then do u mean if there is low cardinality index will not be used?. Regards, Naga On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 2:41 PM, chandru <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > Hi nagaraj, > sorry.. Since the cardinality is low MySQL has chosen *not to use* a Index > that can give the best performance. i missed that. > > > Regards, > Pradeep chandru. > > > > Nagaraj S wrote: > >> Pradeep, >> Can you be clear on your statement. Becoz i read in few links if the >> cardinality is low also mysql doen't use the index. It depends up on the >> where condition used.. >> Regards, >> Naga. >> >> On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 12:22 PM, chandru <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: >> >>Hi Dilip, >> I dont think forcing MySQL to use Index can improve your >>performance. MySQL decides on the index to be used based on the >>cardinality. Since the cardinality is low MySQL has chosen a Index >>that can give the best performance. Forcing that can only increase >>the volume of data that is fetched. >> >>Regards, >>Pradeep chandru. >> >> >> >>Parikh, Dilip Kumar wrote: >> >>>Hi johan, >>> >>>U can use and try to write a query to use index in it (like use >>> index(index name) before where condition. >>>And other variables also looks like ok seems let me check, Please try >>> to send the output of global status. >>> >>>Show global status; >>> >>> >>> >>>Thanks & Regards, >>>Dilipkumar >>> >>>-Original Message- >>>From: chandru [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: >>> Thursday, September 18, 2008 11:36 AM >>>To: Johan Thorvaldsson >>>Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com <mailto:mysql@lists.mysql.com> >>>Subject: Re: Fwd: Why dont my query use the index keys? >>> >>>Hi Johan, >>> the query is going for a temporary table creation "Using temporary; >>> Using filesort" >>> >>>In case your sort_buffer_size is too low please try increasing the >>> same.Be cautious don't try to increase it massively, since it is a per >>> thread memory allocation. >>> >>>please let me know what is your sort_buffer_size by using the command >>> show global variables like 'sort%'; >>> >>> >>> >>>Regards, >>>Pradeep Chandru. >>> >>> >>>Johan Thorvaldsson wrote: >>> >>> >>>>So query and index:es are ok ? Because the query runs very slow. >>>> >>>>Vidarebefordrat brev: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>Från: "Ananda Kumar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>> >>>>>Datum: ti 16 sep 2008 13.19.43 GMT+02:00 >>>>>Till: "Johan Thorvaldsson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>>Kopia: mysql@lists.mysql.com <mailto:mysql@lists.mysql.com> >>>>>Ämne: Re: Why dont my query use the index keys? >>>>> >>>>>Hi Johan, >>>>>Its doing a range based search, so its using index. >>>>> >>>>>regards >>>>>anandkl >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>On 9/16/08, Johan Thorvaldsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>>But this one doesnt use any indexes? >>>>>SIMPLE tm range is_active,ad_id,tag_id * tag_id* 4 >>>>> NULL15353 Using where; Using temporary; Using filesort >>>>> >>>>>Thanks for your replies. >>>>> >>>>>Vidarebefordrat brev: >>>>> >>>>>Från: chandru <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>>Datum: ti 16 sep 2008 10.13.53 GMT+02:00 >>>>>Till: Johan Thorvaldsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>>Kopia: mysql@lists.mysql.com <mailto:mysql@lists.mysql.com> >>>>> >>>>>Ämne: Re: Why dont my query use the index keys? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Hi johan, >>>>>i find that the query is using a index already. >>>>>Explain version: >>>>>1 S
Re: Fwd: Why dont my query use the index keys?
Pradeep, Can you be clear on your statement. Becoz i read in few links if the cardinality is low also mysql doen't use the index. It depends up on the where condition used.. Regards, Naga. On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 12:22 PM, chandru <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > Hi Dilip, > I dont think forcing MySQL to use Index can improve your performance. > MySQL decides on the index to be used based on the cardinality. Since the > cardinality is low MySQL has chosen a Index that can give the best > performance. Forcing that can only increase the volume of data that is > fetched. > > Regards, > Pradeep chandru. > > > > Parikh, Dilip Kumar wrote: > > Hi johan, > > U can use and try to write a query to use index in it (like use index(index > name) before where condition. > And other variables also looks like ok seems let me check, Please try to send > the output of global status. > > Show global status; > > > > Thanks & Regards, > Dilipkumar > > -Original Message- > From: chandru [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>] > Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2008 11:36 AM > To: Johan Thorvaldsson > Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com > Subject: Re: Fwd: Why dont my query use the index keys? > > Hi Johan, > the query is going for a temporary table creation "Using temporary; Using > filesort" > > In case your sort_buffer_size is too low please try increasing the same. > Be cautious don't try to increase it massively, since it is a per thread > memory allocation. > > please let me know what is your sort_buffer_size by using the command show > global variables like 'sort%'; > > > > Regards, > Pradeep Chandru. > > > Johan Thorvaldsson wrote: > > > So query and index:es are ok ? Because the query runs very slow. > > Vidarebefordrat brev: > > > > Från: "Ananda Kumar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Datum: ti 16 sep 2008 13.19.43 GMT+02:00 > Till: "Johan Thorvaldsson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Kopia: mysql@lists.mysql.com > Ämne: Re: Why dont my query use the index keys? > > Hi Johan, > Its doing a range based search, so its using index. > > regards > anandkl > > > On 9/16/08, Johan Thorvaldsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > But this one doesnt use any indexes? > SIMPLE tm range is_active,ad_id,tag_id * tag_id* 4 > NULL15353 Using where; Using temporary; Using filesort > > Thanks for your replies. > > Vidarebefordrat brev: > > Från: chandru <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Datum: ti 16 sep 2008 10.13.53 GMT+02:00 > Till: Johan Thorvaldsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Kopia: mysql@lists.mysql.com > Ämne: Re: Why dont my query use the index keys? > > > Hi johan, > i find that the query is using a index already. > Explain version: > 1 SIMPLE tm range is_active,ad_id,tag_id * tag_id* > 4 NULL15353 Using where; Using temporary; Using filesort > 1 SIMPLE ad eq_ref > PRIMARY,ad_id,is_removed,is_active,whitelisted,ant_feedback_alert > *PRIMARY* 4 rubbt.tm.ad_id 1 > I have bold the index names that are being used. Can you please > clarify is that the one you are trying to find? > > Regards, > Pradeep Chandru. > > > > > Johan Thorvaldsson wrote: > AD > > Create Table: CREATE TABLE `ad` ( > `ad_id` int(11) NOT NULL auto_increment, `ad_key` varchar(32) > collate utf8_swedish_ci NOT NULL default '', `pris` varchar(32) > collate utf8_swedish_ci NOT NULL default '', `pris_original` > varchar(32) collate utf8_swedish_ci NOT NULL default '', `dt_pub` > datetime NOT NULL default '-00-00 00:00:00', `dt_updated` > datetime NOT NULL default '-00-00 00:00:00', `ad_password` > varchar(32) collate utf8_swedish_ci NOT NULL default '', `adtext` > text collate utf8_swedish_ci NOT NULL, `unique_key` varchar(32) > collate utf8_swedish_ci NOT NULL default '', `is_removed` int(11) > NOT NULL default '0', `is_active` int(11) NOT NULL default '0', > `num_images` int(11) default NULL, `sh_phone` int(11) default '0', > `postalcode` varchar(32) collate utf8_swedish_ci default NULL, > `ad_url` varchar(128) collate utf8_swedish_ci NOT NULL default '', > `source_id` int(11) default '0', `youtube_link` text collate > utf8_swedish_ci, `ad_sections` varchar(128) collate utf8_swedish_ci > default NULL, `flickr_link` text collate utf8_swedish_ci, > `ant_feedback_good` int(32) default '0', `ant_feedback_alert` > int(32) default '0', `whitelisted` int(11) default '0', > `adtext_plain` text collate utf8_swedish_ci NOT NULL, `dt_img_path` > datetime NOT NULL default '-00-00 00:00:00', PRIMARY KEY > (`ad_id`), KEY `sortkey` (`dt_pub`,`pris`), KEY `webbid` > (`ad_key`), KEY `ad_id` (`ad_id`) > ) ENGINE=MyISAM AUTO_INCREMENT=18721 DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8 > COLLATE=utf8_swedish_ci > > +---++--+--+-+---+-+--++--++-+ > > | Table | Non_unique | Key_name | Seq_in_index | Column_name | > Collation | Cardinality | S
Re: Fwd: Why dont my query use the index keys?
Pradeep, Can you be clear on your statement. Becoz i read in few links if the cardinality is low also mysql doen't use the index. It depends up on the where condition used.. Regards, Naga. On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 12:22 PM, chandru <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > Hi Dilip, > I dont think forcing MySQL to use Index can improve your performance. > MySQL decides on the index to be used based on the cardinality. Since the > cardinality is low MySQL has chosen a Index that can give the best > performance. Forcing that can only increase the volume of data that is > fetched. > > Regards, > Pradeep chandru. > > > > Parikh, Dilip Kumar wrote: > > Hi johan, > > U can use and try to write a query to use index in it (like use index(index > name) before where condition. > And other variables also looks like ok seems let me check, Please try to send > the output of global status. > > Show global status; > > > > Thanks & Regards, > Dilipkumar > > -Original Message- > From: chandru [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>] > Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2008 11:36 AM > To: Johan Thorvaldsson > Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com > Subject: Re: Fwd: Why dont my query use the index keys? > > Hi Johan, > the query is going for a temporary table creation "Using temporary; Using > filesort" > > In case your sort_buffer_size is too low please try increasing the same. > Be cautious don't try to increase it massively, since it is a per thread > memory allocation. > > please let me know what is your sort_buffer_size by using the command show > global variables like 'sort%'; > > > > Regards, > Pradeep Chandru. > > > Johan Thorvaldsson wrote: > > > So query and index:es are ok ? Because the query runs very slow. > > Vidarebefordrat brev: > > > > Från: "Ananda Kumar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Datum: ti 16 sep 2008 13.19.43 GMT+02:00 > Till: "Johan Thorvaldsson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Kopia: mysql@lists.mysql.com > Ämne: Re: Why dont my query use the index keys? > > Hi Johan, > Its doing a range based search, so its using index. > > regards > anandkl > > > On 9/16/08, Johan Thorvaldsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > But this one doesnt use any indexes? > SIMPLE tm range is_active,ad_id,tag_id * tag_id* 4 > NULL15353 Using where; Using temporary; Using filesort > > Thanks for your replies. > > Vidarebefordrat brev: > > Från: chandru <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Datum: ti 16 sep 2008 10.13.53 GMT+02:00 > Till: Johan Thorvaldsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Kopia: mysql@lists.mysql.com > Ämne: Re: Why dont my query use the index keys? > > > Hi johan, > i find that the query is using a index already. > Explain version: > 1 SIMPLE tm range is_active,ad_id,tag_id * tag_id* > 4 NULL15353 Using where; Using temporary; Using filesort > 1 SIMPLE ad eq_ref > PRIMARY,ad_id,is_removed,is_active,whitelisted,ant_feedback_alert > *PRIMARY* 4 rubbt.tm.ad_id 1 > I have bold the index names that are being used. Can you please > clarify is that the one you are trying to find? > > Regards, > Pradeep Chandru. > > > > > Johan Thorvaldsson wrote: > AD > > Create Table: CREATE TABLE `ad` ( > `ad_id` int(11) NOT NULL auto_increment, `ad_key` varchar(32) > collate utf8_swedish_ci NOT NULL default '', `pris` varchar(32) > collate utf8_swedish_ci NOT NULL default '', `pris_original` > varchar(32) collate utf8_swedish_ci NOT NULL default '', `dt_pub` > datetime NOT NULL default '-00-00 00:00:00', `dt_updated` > datetime NOT NULL default '-00-00 00:00:00', `ad_password` > varchar(32) collate utf8_swedish_ci NOT NULL default '', `adtext` > text collate utf8_swedish_ci NOT NULL, `unique_key` varchar(32) > collate utf8_swedish_ci NOT NULL default '', `is_removed` int(11) > NOT NULL default '0', `is_active` int(11) NOT NULL default '0', > `num_images` int(11) default NULL, `sh_phone` int(11) default '0', > `postalcode` varchar(32) collate utf8_swedish_ci default NULL, > `ad_url` varchar(128) collate utf8_swedish_ci NOT NULL default '', > `source_id` int(11) default '0', `youtube_link` text collate > utf8_swedish_ci, `ad_sections` varchar(128) collate utf8_swedish_ci > default NULL, `flickr_link` text collate utf8_swedish_ci, > `ant_feedback_good` int(32) default '0', `ant_feedback_alert` > int(32) default '0', `whitelisted` int(11) default '0', > `adtext_plain` text collate utf8_swedish_ci NOT NULL, `dt_img_path` > datetime NOT NULL default '-00-00 00:00:00', PRIMARY KEY > (`ad_id`), KEY `sortkey` (`dt_pub`,`pris`), KEY `webbid` > (`ad_key`), KEY `ad_id` (`ad_id`) > ) ENGINE=MyISAM AUTO_INCREMENT=18721 DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8 > COLLATE=utf8_swedish_ci > > +---++--+--+-+---+-+--++--++-+ > > | Table | Non_unique | Key_name | Seq_in_index | Column_name | > Collation | Cardinality | S
