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
mysql show global variables like 'sort%';
+--+-+
| Variable_name| Value |
+--+-+
| sort_buffer_size | 4194296 |
+--+-+
1 row in set (0.01 sec)
18 sep 2008 kl. 08.05 skrev chandru:
Hi Johan,
the query is going for a
Hi johan,
you have allocated 4M for your sort buffer size is ok. So i feel that
the query is loading more than 4MB of data so it is creating a temporary
file to do a sorting. please try to put some logic into the query that
you use to load the appropriate data. I find that the tag_id has a
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
OR
Try Using this query ...Just a try
SELECT COUNT(*) antal, ad.ad_url, ad.adtext_plain FROM ad use index(index_name)
LEFT JOIN tag_ad_map tm ON concat(tm.ad_id=ad.ad_id)
WHERE tm.tag_id IN (99, 10807, 20728, 447, 807) AND (ad.is_removed = 0 AND
ad.is_active=1 AND (ad.ant_feedback_alert
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
HI !
Stut schrieb:
On 17 Sep 2008, at 22:12, Jerry Schwartz wrote:
I have records that should be sequentially (not auto-increment) numbered,
but there are gaps. Is there any elegant way of finding the gaps?
Why do they need to be sequential? When this requirement comes up it's
usually for
Hi !
Stut schrieb:
On 17 Sep 2008, at 22:12, Jerry Schwartz wrote:
I have records that should be sequentially (not auto-increment) numbered,
but there are gaps. Is there any elegant way of finding the gaps?
Why do they need to be sequential? When this requirement comes up it's
usually for
Hi pradeep,
What are you trying to say ?. The query clearly denotes that Index is not been
used anywhere. So i strongly suggest to use the index explicitly for better
performance.
Forcing that can only increase the volume of data that is fetched. ?
I cant understand how it
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
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
Part of the problem is that I can't stop the server.
Oh, so it does start? I thought it also wasn't starting, if it's not starting
then stopping it will fail.
Is there anything else I can do to get a clean install of
MySQL running
again?
Can you list what appears in the process list? A
On 18 Sep 2008, at 07:45, Joerg Bruehe wrote:
Stut schrieb:
On 17 Sep 2008, at 22:12, Jerry Schwartz wrote:
I have records that should be sequentially (not auto-increment)
numbered,
but there are gaps. Is there any elegant way of finding the gaps?
Why do they need to be sequential? When
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
Hi Dilip,
MySQL algorithm decides based on cardinality. Cardinality means the
value of unique entries in the table. Hence when MySQL finds that there
are very less unique values, mysql does not use that index. If the table
is optimized then value of the cardinality will stay updated. Scanning
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.
Hi ,
So you are trying to say that 1) when the Table has Low Cardinality, Mysql wont
use Index? Is this the logic behind your words?
And also do you mean that the select query without index will be faster than
that of the select query with Index? I just don't believe it. Then what is
the
Hi nagaraj,
yes by default, but if you know that the cardinality value that mysql
has calculated is very old ( since you have not optimized it) then
forcing a index can improve your performance as Dilip has mentioned in
the before mail. If you are not sure always better to let mysql decide
on
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 1:33 PM, Glyn Astill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Part of the problem is that I can't stop the server.
Oh, so it does start? I thought it also wasn't starting, if it's not
starting then stopping it will fail.
The book MySQL, Fourth Edition (aka Doorstop IV) has been published.
More information is available at the book's Web site:
http://www.kitebird.com/mysql-book/
--
Paul DuBois
Sun Microsystems / MySQL Documentation Team
Madison, Wisconsin, USA
www.mysql.com
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For
On Thu, 2008-09-18 at 09:58 +0100, Stut wrote:
Autonumber will accomplish that, so long as you don't delete any.
And
if you do, renumbering the bookings would cause more problems than
it
solved.
Autonumber has the possibility of gaps. When a record is insert, the
counter is
Hi !
Parikh, Dilip Kumar schrieb:
Hi ,
So you are trying to say that 1) when the Table has Low Cardinality, Mysql
wont use Index? Is this the logic behind your words?
Extreme example:
If you are manually looking up one entry from a list of five (say, in a
cookbook), would you go
MySQL List,
Thanks for your advice and help. I tried various things suggested, and
in the end, this is what seems to have worked (I've abbreviated most of
the output):
$ sudo pkill -9 mysqld
$ sudo dpkg --force-all -r mysql-server-5.0
This removed MySQL, but left the configuration files. I
-Original Message-
From: Stut [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2008 6:30 PM
To: Jerry Schwartz
Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: Finding gaps
On 17 Sep 2008, at 22:34, Jerry Schwartz wrote:
Our Japanese partners will notice and will ask. Similar things have
Yes, that would have been a very good idea. I did not design this.
Even if we used auto-increment, my current problem would be the same:
finding gaps in the numbering.
Regards,
Jerry Schwartz
The Infoshop by Global Information Incorporated
195 Farmington Ave.
Farmington, CT 06032
Hi all,
I'm just throwing something out ...
How about:
select a.id,b.id from dataset a left join dataset b
on a.id=b.id+1
where b.id is null;
This should find single gaps. It won't find larger gaps.
Just my $.02.
Mike.
On Thursday 18 September 2008 10:44:47 am Jerry
Alas, the gaps are as large as 500.
Normally, products are never deleted from the system; but I put in some
corrupt data that I did not want to pass along, even if I marked them as
discontinued. They complain about that, too.
Regards,
Jerry Schwartz
The Infoshop by Global Information
I see the following log files
-rw-rw 1 mysql mysql 10485760 Sep 16 17:30 ibdata1
-rw-rw 1 mysql mysql5242880 Sep 16 17:30 ib_logfile0
-rw-rw 1 mysql mysql5242880 Jan 17 2006 ib_logfile1
I checked every table on all databases. All are using MYISAM.
innodb section in
In the last episode (Sep 18), AM Corona said:
I see the following log files
-rw-rw 1 mysql mysql 10485760 Sep 16 17:30 ibdata1
-rw-rw 1 mysql mysql5242880 Sep 16 17:30 ib_logfile0
-rw-rw 1 mysql mysql5242880 Jan 17 2006 ib_logfile1
I checked every table on all
29 matches
Mail list logo
