Re: Re[2]: Can MySQL handle 120 million records?
At 13:08 +0100 12/19/02, Harald Fuchs wrote: In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dyego Souza do Carmo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Dobrý den, quarta-feira, 18 de dezembro de 2002, 13:10:07, napsal jste: MTB> Qunfeng Dong wrote: Another thing, with some linux system, there is a size limit for file. MySQL seems to store each of its table as single file. You need to choose a file system without that limit. MTB> Just use InnoDB tables for these files and you won't have a problem MTB> AFAIK; you can have multiple 2G files that are used to create one big MTB> table if you like (any InnoDB people want to comment on actual limits?) Use the InnoDB tables with the raw devices ( ex: allow innodb use a /dev/sdxx or /dev/hdxx to write tablespace ), the speed is better, MySQL don't loses time with the filesystem. In my production database , i have a tablespace with 130G ( with raw diveces on SCSI disks) and the performance is good :) /dev/sdxx or /dev/hdxx are _not_ raw devices; they are disk partitions without a file system, but still subject to the Linux buffer cache. "man 8 raw" says how to bind a disk partition to a true raw device (/dev/raw/rawX). And yes, those beasts work fine with InnoDB. I asked Heikki about this. His reply: Paul, you can use a disk partition which Linux buffers in its file cache, and you can use also a 'raw device disk partition' which Linux probably does not buffer. Google the mailing list. In summer a Swiss user was able to get a raw device working as a data file. I have no measurements of performance raw device / buffered disk partition. In theory, a raw device should be faster. fsync was extremely slow in Linux-2.2, and is still a bit slow in 2.4. Regards, Heikki - 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: Re[2]: Can MySQL handle 120 million records?
At 13:08 +0100 12/19/02, Harald Fuchs wrote: In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dyego Souza do Carmo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Dobrý den, quarta-feira, 18 de dezembro de 2002, 13:10:07, napsal jste: MTB> Qunfeng Dong wrote: Another thing, with some linux system, there is a size limit for file. MySQL seems to store each of its table as single file. You need to choose a file system without that limit. MTB> Just use InnoDB tables for these files and you won't have a problem MTB> AFAIK; you can have multiple 2G files that are used to create one big MTB> table if you like (any InnoDB people want to comment on actual limits?) Use the InnoDB tables with the raw devices ( ex: allow innodb use a /dev/sdxx or /dev/hdxx to write tablespace ), the speed is better, MySQL don't loses time with the filesystem. In my production database , i have a tablespace with 130G ( with raw diveces on SCSI disks) and the performance is good :) /dev/sdxx or /dev/hdxx are _not_ raw devices; they are disk partitions without a file system, but still subject to the Linux buffer cache. "man 8 raw" says how to bind a disk partition to a true raw device (/dev/raw/rawX). And yes, those beasts work fine with InnoDB. The InnoDB documentation refers to partitions as raw devices, so that's how we talk about them, too. :-) - 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[2]: Can MySQL handle 120 million records?
Dobrý den, quarta-feira, 18 de dezembro de 2002, 13:10:07, napsal jste: MTB> Qunfeng Dong wrote: >>Another thing, with some linux system, there is a size >>limit for file. MySQL seems to store each of its table >>as single file. You need to choose a file system >>without that limit. >> MTB> Just use InnoDB tables for these files and you won't have a problem MTB> AFAIK; you can have multiple 2G files that are used to create one big MTB> table if you like (any InnoDB people want to comment on actual limits?) Use the InnoDB tables with the raw devices ( ex: allow innodb use a /dev/sdxx or /dev/hdxx to write tablespace ), the speed is better, MySQL don't loses time with the filesystem. In my production database , i have a tablespace with 130G ( with raw diveces on SCSI disks) and the performance is good :) ps: i'm using MySQL 4.0.5 sql,query - ++ Dyego Souza do Carmo ++ Dep. Desenvolvimento - E S C R I B A I N F O R M A T I C A - The only stupid question is the unasked one (somewhere in Linux's HowTo) Linux registred user : #230601 -- $ look into "my eyes" look: cannot open my eyes - Reply: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - 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
