Re: write lock and sql_cache

2008-03-13 Thread MAS! 

I agree.  Don't duplicate posts or post to multiple lists.  Jump on
the IRC channel if you need help right away :-)


sorry again, I was not in hurry, but I had a fault on my mailer,  
since I was trying to send the post from office and from the wrong  
account..



The query_cache_wlock_invalidate server variable controls the behavior
you are seeing.  You can configure it as desired.


thank you so much to all..

by
MAS!


--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]

write lock and sql_cache

2008-03-12 Thread Marco Stagno 
does the lock table on MySQL (I'm using 5.0.22 or 5.0.45) works  
even for a cached result?


this is my scenario, (I'm using MyIsam tables)

thread 1:
LOCK TABLE foo WRITE;

thread 2:
SELECT * FROM foo ;
(locked)

thread 1:
UNLOCK TABLES;

thread 2:
result of SELECT * ..

and that's is, IMHO, correct; btw, since the result of the select is  
in the cache, it seems I'm unable to 'lock' again the table:


thread 1:
LOCK TABLE foo WRITE;

thread 2:
SELECT * FROM foo ;
I have the result of the select :(

the only way I found to avoid that is use the SQL_NO_CACHE (then  
SELECT SQL_NO_CACHE FROM foo)


is that correct?! there is a way to avoid to specify SQL_NO_CACHE ?
or there is something wrong ?!
thank you in avance.
bye bye
marco



--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]

write lock and sql_cache

2008-03-12 Thread MAS! 
does the lock table on MySQL (I'm using 5.0.22 or 5.0.45) works  
even for a cached result?


this is my scenario, (I'm using MyIsam tables)

thread 1:
LOCK TABLE foo WRITE;

thread 2:
SELECT * FROM foo ;
(locked)

thread 1:
UNLOCK TABLES;

thread 2:
result of SELECT * ..

and that's is, IMHO, correct; btw, since the result of the select is  
in the cache, it seems I'm unable to 'lock' again the table:


thread 1:
LOCK TABLE foo WRITE;

thread 2:
SELECT * FROM foo ;
I have the result of the select :(

the only way I found to avoid that is use the SQL_NO_CACHE (then  
SELECT SQL_NO_CACHE FROM foo)


is that correct?! there is a way to avoid to specify SQL_NO_CACHE ?
or there is something wrong ?!
thank you in avance.
bye bye
marco



--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]

write lock and sql_cache

2008-03-12 Thread MAS! 
does the lock table on MySQL (I'm using 5.0.22 or 5.0.45) works  
even for a cached result?


this is my scenario, (I'm using MyIsam tables)

thread 1:
LOCK TABLE foo WRITE;

thread 2:
SELECT * FROM foo ;
(locked)

thread 1:
UNLOCK TABLES;

thread 2:
result of SELECT * ..

and that's is, IMHO, correct; btw, if the result of the select is in  
the cache, it seems that I'm unable to 'lock' again the table:


thread 1:
LOCK TABLE foo WRITE;

thread 2:
SELECT * FROM foo ;
I have the result of the select; that was not 'locked' :(

the only way I found to avoid that is use the SQL_NO_CACHE (then  
SELECT SQL_NO_CACHE FROM foo)


is that correct?! there is a way to avoid to specify SQL_NO_CACHE ?
or there is something wrong ?!
thank you in avance.
bye bye
marco



--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: write lock and sql_cache

2008-03-12 Thread Daniel Brown 
On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 3:15 PM, MAS! [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 does the lock table on MySQL (I'm using 5.0.22 or 5.0.45) works
  even for a cached result?

Hold your horses, dude.  That's the third time you sent that
email.  Someone will give you an answer if you're patient.

If you can't wait (or don't feel like it), check out the forum at
http://www.mysqlfreaks.com/.

Best of luck, Marco!

-- 
/Dan

Daniel P. Brown
Senior Unix Geek
? while(1) { $me = $mind--; sleep(86400); } ?

-- 
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: write lock and sql_cache

2008-03-12 Thread Baron Schwartz 
On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 3:22 PM, Daniel Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 3:15 PM, MAS! [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
   does the lock table on MySQL (I'm using 5.0.22 or 5.0.45) works
even for a cached result?

 Hold your horses, dude.  That's the third time you sent that
  email.  Someone will give you an answer if you're patient.

I agree.  Don't duplicate posts or post to multiple lists.  Jump on
the IRC channel if you need help right away :-)

The query_cache_wlock_invalidate server variable controls the behavior
you are seeing.  You can configure it as desired.

Baron

-- 
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: write lock and sql_cache

2008-03-12 Thread Werner Puschitz 
MAS! wrote:
 does the lock table on MySQL (I'm using 5.0.22 or 5.0.45) works even
 for a cached result?
 
 this is my scenario, (I'm using MyIsam tables)
 
 thread 1:
 LOCK TABLE foo WRITE;
 
 thread 2:
 SELECT * FROM foo ;
 (locked)
 
 thread 1:
 UNLOCK TABLES;
 
 thread 2:
 result of SELECT * ..
 
 and that's is, IMHO, correct; btw, if the result of the select is in the
 cache, it seems that I'm unable to 'lock' again the table:
 
 thread 1:
 LOCK TABLE foo WRITE;
 
 thread 2:
 SELECT * FROM foo ;
 I have the result of the select; that was not 'locked' :(
 
 the only way I found to avoid that is use the SQL_NO_CACHE (then SELECT
 SQL_NO_CACHE FROM foo)
 
 is that correct?! there is a way to avoid to specify SQL_NO_CACHE ?
 or there is something wrong ?!

Try setting query_cache_wlock_invalidate to ON.

Werner


-- 
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]