> * - For example: We faced a NASTY problem using AMD 64-bit CPUs + SATA +
> Linux where I/O on the system (the WHOLE system, not JUST the SATA
> spindles -- network, PATA, USB, EVERYTHING) would suddenly come to a
> grinding halt (or very nearly halted) randomly when the SATA subsystem
> was under
Hi All,
I want to restrict all direct access to tables and allow users access
only through the stored procedures.
However, I haven't seen any explicit mention in the docs that one can
return a resultset/recordset from a stored routine - that's what I can
do using MS-SQL Server. If this cannot be
At 07:16 PM 7/12/2006, Yvan wrote:
rturnbull wrote:
Yvan,
I used three different packages for Linux. 1) Was the source tar.gz
2) was the rpm which I converted to a tgz file (slackware) 3) was the
compiled binary version of the workbench. Here are the filenames
mysql-workbench-1.0.6
rturnbull wrote:
Yvan,
I used three different packages for Linux. 1) Was the source
tar.gz 2) was the rpm which I converted to a tgz file (slackware) 3)
was the compiled binary version of the workbench. Here are the
filenames
mysql-workbench-1.0.6beta-1.i386.rpm
mysql-workbench-1.0.
> -Original Message-
> From: Chris White [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 5:15 PM
> To: mysql@lists.mysql.com
> Subject: Re: I don't understand why SCSI is preferred.
>
> On Wednesday 12 July 2006 01:13 pm, Tim Lucia wrote:
> > I've seen whitepapers from MySQL's
On Wednesday 12 July 2006 01:13 pm, Tim Lucia wrote:
> I've seen whitepapers from MySQL's web site, co-authored with Dell, that
> recommend the hardware optimization be:
>
> 1. More Memory
> 2. Faster Drives (15K RPM is better the 10K)
> 3. Faster CPU.
Oh wait, we forgot #4:
> 4. Filesystem
You
On Jul 12, 2006, at 12:58 PM, Chris White wrote:
On Tuesday 11 July 2006 04:18 pm, Brian Dunning wrote:
My understanding is that SCSI has a faster transfer rate, for
transferring large files. A busy database needs really fast access,
for making numerous fast calls all over the disk. Two differ
On Wednesday 12 July 2006 01:13 pm, Tim Lucia wrote:
> I've seen whitepapers from MySQL's web site, co-authored with Dell, that
> recommend the hardware optimization be:
>
> 1. More Memory
That's a definite
> 2. Faster Drives (15K RPM is better the 10K)
Well, I guess for any server really, the f
On Jul 12, 2006, at 12:56 PM, Daniel da Veiga wrote:
On 7/12/06, mos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
At 12:42 PM 7/12/2006, you wrote:
>On Tuesday 11 July 2006 19:26, mos wrote:
> > SCSI drives are also designed to run 24/7 whereas IDE drives
are more
> > likely to fail if used on a busy server.
On Jul 12, 2006, at 12:45 PM, Scott Tanner wrote:
I am hoping the newer SATA II drives will provide SCSI performance
at a
reasonable price. It would be interesting to see if anyone has
polled ISP's
to see what they're using. I know they charge more (or at least
they used
to) for SCSI d
On Wednesday 12 July 2006 20:11, mos wrote:
> To get the MTBF estimate, the manufacturer will power on 100 drives (or
> more) and time to see when the first one fails. If it fails in 1000 hours,
> then the MTBF is 100x1000hrs or 100,000 hours.
I don't know much statistics,
but I do know that tha
This REALLY should be an academic concern. Either you have a system
that can tolerate the failure of a drive, or you do not. The
frequency of failure rates is pretty much irrelevant: You can train
incredibly non-technical (inexpensive) people to respond to a pager
and hot-swap a bad driv
Yvan,
I used three different packages for Linux. 1) Was the source tar.gz
2) was the rpm which I converted to a tgz file (slackware) 3) was the
compiled binary version of the workbench. Here are the filenames
mysql-workbench-1.0.6beta-1.i386.rpm
mysql-workbench-1.0.6beta-1.i386.tgz
my
I've seen whitepapers from MySQL's web site, co-authored with Dell, that
recommend the hardware optimization be:
1. More Memory
2. Faster Drives (15K RPM is better the 10K)
3. Faster CPU.
Based on this, we're spec'ing 2950s with 16Gb, dual 2.8 dual-core Xeons, and
146Gb 15K (times 6) drives.
The
rturnbull wrote:
Hello to all,
I'm having some problems with the linux copy of mysql-workbench.
Great features and all, if I could get them to work.
What I'm trying to do is reverse-engineer a INNODB database I have
in mysql 5.0 on my local machine.
I go through the steps right to
On Tuesday 11 July 2006 04:18 pm, Brian Dunning wrote:
> My understanding is that SCSI has a faster transfer rate, for
> transferring large files. A busy database needs really fast access,
> for making numerous fast calls all over the disk. Two different,
> unrelated things.
>
> I am more than will
On 7/12/06, mos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
At 12:42 PM 7/12/2006, you wrote:
>On Tuesday 11 July 2006 19:26, mos wrote:
> > SCSI drives are also designed to run 24/7 whereas IDE drives are more
> > likely to fail if used on a busy server.
>
>This used to be the case. But there are SATA drives ou
>
> I am hoping the newer SATA II drives will provide SCSI performance at a
> reasonable price. It would be interesting to see if anyone has polled ISP's
> to see what they're using. I know they charge more (or at least they used
> to) for SCSI drives if you are renting a server from them. It
Isaac Davis-King wrote:
I would like to create a user that has the ability to create databases. I
would also like the user to be able to have all privileges including grant
over the databases they create. However, I do not want them to have any
access to other databases on the server. I've been
At 12:42 PM 7/12/2006, you wrote:
On Tuesday 11 July 2006 19:26, mos wrote:
> SCSI drives are also designed to run 24/7 whereas IDE drives are more
> likely to fail if used on a busy server.
This used to be the case. But there are SATA drives out there now being made
for "enterprise class," 100
I would like to create a user that has the ability to create databases. I
would also like the user to be able to have all privileges including grant
over the databases they create. However, I do not want them to have any
access to other databases on the server. I've been digging through the
docum
On Tuesday 11 July 2006 19:26, mos wrote:
> SCSI drives are also designed to run 24/7 whereas IDE drives are more
> likely to fail if used on a busy server.
This used to be the case. But there are SATA drives out there now being made
for "enterprise class," 100% duty cycle operations. See, for
On 7/11/06, Brian Dunning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
My understanding is that SCSI has a faster transfer rate, for
transferring large files. A busy database needs really fast access,
Your statement is partially correct, yes, it has faster transfer
rates, but that is not only for tranfer large f
I would like to create a user that has the ability to create databases. I
would also like the user to be able to have all privileges including grant
over the databases they create. However, I do not want them to have any
access to other databases on the server. I've been digging through the
docum
Svilen Spasov (Ancient Media) wrote:
Hello,
I have a website with a MySQL database and I have a table with ~2
millions row (usernames, filenames; ~120MB db data file and ~230MB db
index file) with I would like to search using the fulltext indeces.
Unfortunately the server get loaded pretty m
The message contains Unicode characters and has been sent as a binary
attachment.
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Willy, the docs on MySQL's site have a lot of good information:
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/4.1/en/optimize-overview.html
Also, Jeremy Zawodny's book "High Performance MySQL" (O'Reilly) is an
excellent guide to MySQL tuning, performance, replication - and it was
written for 4.1, right up your
Gabriel PREDA wrote:
The JOIN criteria was there: 'event.cid=data.cid'
It was not there in the upper example he gave where he stated the problem.
It was there in the later query he said he also tried.
His query was fine: Select event.cid, event.timestamp from event, data
Where ( event.time
Cover the basics first by looking at the SHOW STATUS results. You shold make yourself familiar with what these variables are telling
you. It'll help in determining your bottleneck.
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/4.1/en/server-status-variables.html
Right of the bat, look at the Threads_created n
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
MySQL Connector/J 5.0.2 Beta, a new version of the Type-IV all-Java JDBC
driver for MySQL has been released. This is the last planned beta
release of this branch of the driver. Please notice that version 5.0.1
wasn't released due to a last-minute
Hello,
I have a website with a MySQL database and I have a table with ~2
millions row (usernames, filenames; ~120MB db data file and ~230MB db
index file) with I would like to search using the fulltext indeces.
Unfortunately the server get loaded pretty much. It always stays on
20 load av
Interesting setup. You're using one more join than you need to. Your query
should look like this:
SELECT
DISTINCT(fvr.DocumentID)
FROM
FieldValueRelation fvr
INNER JOIN
FieldValueRelation fvr2
ON fvr.DocumentID = fvr2.DocumentID
AND fvr2.FieldValueID = '1569'
WHERE fvr1.FieldValueID = '1344'
Y
The JOIN criteria was there: 'event.cid=data.cid'
His query was fine: Select event.cid, event.timestamp from event, data
Where ( event.timestamp between '2006-05-01' AND '2006-05-15' ) and
event.cid=data.cid;
It may be rewritten into:
SELECT event.cid, event.timestamp
FROM event JOIN data ON ev
It's your MySQL client that's run out of memory, not the server. I don't know how many rows MySQL is trying to return. Probably an
enormous amount since you're not sepcifying a join criteria on the data table. The number of records in the event table between
'2006-05-01' AND '2006-05-15' times th
Willy wrote:
Hello,
I have a MyISAM table:
CREATE TABLE `dlr` (
`msisdn` varchar(20) NOT NULL default '',
`source` varchar(20) NOT NULL default '',
`operator_id` varchar(20) NOT NULL default '',
`sms_message` longtext NOT NULL,
`smsc_id` varchar(20) NOT NULL default '',
`sms_id` varc
The Chinese translation of the MySQL Reference Manual is complete. It
was done by one of our partners from Beijing, People's Republic of
China, and covers MySQL 5.1. Due to problems beyond our control it's not
available in CHM or PDF, but you can view it online, or download the
HTML version:
http:
Hi,
table_cache is 8 on our systems. I quick glance at the manual tells me to
increase that value (Opened_tables is 2680462406)... I will try that.
Thanks ;)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 12:32 PM
To: Moritz Möller
C
I will try that.
But the symptoms are a little bit different - the server works fine for 3-4
hours, but when it gets slow, neither cpu nor disk-io reach the limit.
As far as I know a cache/memory-bottleneck should turn cpu to 100%, like you
have observed.
In our case I guess it's a locking issue
Hi,
that variable is not set, so it should be the default value (2 * number of
processors I believe).
To what value should I set it?
-Original Message-
From: Gabriel PREDA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 10:02 AM
To: Moritz Möller
Subject: Re: mysterious speedup
Hey all. Well I just finished my first version of a little tool I have
affectionately dubbed "dumpster".
I do use my own SQL wrapper functions, but they should map fairly cleanly to
a search and replace for the stock PHP mysql_*() ones, or your own ones.
Mad props to Peter Brawley [EMAIL PROTEC
40 matches
Mail list logo
