thanks
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 10:42 PM, wrote:
> Quoting Norman Khine :
>
>
>>>
>>> What is shown from "show master status" and "show slave status" after you
>>> have made a change on the master DB?
>>
>> this is the output:
>>
>> http://pastie.org/1100610
>>
>> it does not seem to have any cha
>From what I have read, ALTER TABLE to add an index causes the entire
table to be duplicated, so wouldn't my ALTER TABLE command be
duplicating the work done by the SELECT command?
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 4:50 PM, mos wrote:
> At 02:52 PM 8/18/2010, Xn Nooby wrote:
>>
>> Below is a generic vers
It appears the ALTER TABLE starts off quick, and then slows down. I
feel like the indices are larger than allocated RAM, and the system is
slowing down because it is busy swapping out to disk. Is there an
InnoDB specific buffer than can help this? The "sort_buffer_size"
apparently is only for IS
Hi Mike, my comments are below:
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 4:50 PM, mos wrote:
> At 02:52 PM 8/18/2010, Xn Nooby wrote:
>>
>> Below is a generic version of the code I am trying. It does copy the
>> rows very quickly, but I will have to test to see how quickly the
>> indices are built. Is the below
At 02:52 PM 8/18/2010, Xn Nooby wrote:
Below is a generic version of the code I am trying. It does copy the
rows very quickly, but I will have to test to see how quickly the
indices are built. Is the below code what you were suggesting? I had
a little trouble dropping and later adding the prim
Quoting Norman Khine :
What is shown from "show master status" and "show slave status" after you
have made a change on the master DB?
this is the output:
http://pastie.org/1100610
it does not seem to have any changes and "show slave status" is just empty.
have i missed to add something to
Below is a generic version of the code I am trying. It does copy the
rows very quickly, but I will have to test to see how quickly the
indices are built. Is the below code what you were suggesting? I had
a little trouble dropping and later adding the primary index, but I
think I got it figured o
On 18.08.2010 20:42 CE(S)T, Mark Matthews wrote:
> For what it's worth, the MySQL JDBC driver has had client-side SSL
> require (i.e. "requireSSL=true") since 2003 and the ADO.Net driver
> has had "SSL Mode=Required" since 2009.
Cool, so would it be possible to also have this in the MySQL Workbenc
Hi,
does anyone know when the GA release on a 5.5 or 5.6 trunk is planned? I
noticed that the versions switched from 5.5.4-beta to 5.5.5-m3 in only a
few weeks. But it happened so often the after milestone was followed by
another beta release instead of the next GA release, that I have no clue
hi
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 8:00 PM, wrote:
> Quoting Norman Khine :
>
>> hello,
>> i have an issue with the replication here is my procedure:
>>
>> http://pastie.org/1100368
>>
>> in the log it shows replication works, but when i update a record this
>> is not updated on the server.
>
> What is
On Aug 18, 2010, at 1:34 PM, Shawn Green (MySQL) wrote:
> On 8/18/2010 2:22 PM, Anders Kaseorg wrote:
>> On Wed, 18 Aug 2010, Shawn Green (MySQL) wrote:
>>> If the server specifies REQUIRES SSL then that client cannot connect
>>> without going through the full SSL validation process. This means
On 8/12/2010 2:32 PM, Mike Spreitzer wrote:
I also find that if I have both tables in MyISAM and use STRAIGHT_JOIN to
force the better query plan (enumerate the longer table, for each longer
table row use the shorter table's index to pick out the one right matching
row from the shorter table) t
On 8/18/2010 2:22 PM, Anders Kaseorg wrote:
On Wed, 18 Aug 2010, Shawn Green (MySQL) wrote:
If the server specifies REQUIRES SSL then that client cannot connect
without going through the full SSL validation process. This means that
Mallory would need to present the same security credentials tha
On Wed, 18 Aug 2010, Shawn Green (MySQL) wrote:
> If the server specifies REQUIRES SSL then that client cannot connect
> without going through the full SSL validation process. This means that
> Mallory would need to present the same security credentials that Alice
> has in order to qualify as a
Quoting Norman Khine :
hello,
i have an issue with the replication here is my procedure:
http://pastie.org/1100368
in the log it shows replication works, but when i update a record this
is not updated on the server.
What is shown from "show master status" and "show slave status" after
you
What are you using as your primary key on this table? Is an auto_increment
field or something non-sequential? Do you have your secondary indexes in
place while you load the table or are you explicitly disabling them and
re-enabling them afterward?
-Travis
-Original Message-
From: Xn No
hello,
i have an issue with the replication here is my procedure:
http://pastie.org/1100368
in the log it shows replication works, but when i update a record this
is not updated on the server.
any help much appreciated.
--
˙uʍop ǝpısdn p,uɹnʇ pןɹoʍ ǝɥʇ ǝǝs noʎ 'ʇuǝɯɐן sǝɯıʇ ǝɥʇ puɐ 'ʇuǝʇuoɔ
ǝq
At 10:34 AM 8/18/2010, Xn Nooby wrote:
minutes to dump the 70M rows. However, it takes the LOAD FILE command
13 hours to import the CSV file. My
understanding of LOAD FILE was that it was already optimized to load
the data, then build the indices afterwords. I
don't understand why it takes so
Hi,
Whenever i run any commnd on mysql it gives message as below then gives the
result successfully. What is the reason of the below error message :
ERROR 2006 (HY000): MySQL server has gone away
No connection. Trying to reconnect...
Connection id: 264550
Current database: *** NONE ***
I have been trying to speed up an ALTER TABLE command that adds a
column to a large InnoDB table of about 80M rows.
I have found and tried many different methods, but they are all slow.I
have tried both optimizing the ALTER TABLE
command, and dumping and loading the table (in both SQL and CSV
for
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 8:35 AM, Nunzio Daveri wrote:
>
> The server in this case is a stand alone with nothing more then CentOS and
> MySQL
> 5.1.44 on it. The drives are sas 10K rpm drives. The problem I see is that
> when you stress test the server (typically by running loads of reports -
> s
Hi Baron
This tool works better than mytop, you solved my problem, thanks a lot
Carlos
> Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 10:41:23 -0400
> Subject: Re: Problem with mytop
> From: ba...@xaprb.com
> To: mysql@lists.mysql.com
>
> Carlos,
>
> Have you tried innotop instead? It's a better replacement fo
Hi all, I have upgraded a few test boxes and everything seems to work fine BUT
I
wanted to verify with the gurus if my syntax is correct so as to avoid any
future problems ;-)
The purpose is to dump all databases and users / user privileges from our
4.1.20
server and import it into our 5.1.49
On 8/17/2010 6:13 PM, Yves Goergen wrote:
... snip ...
(Oh look, the "MySQL" guy already has an oracle.com e-mail address...)
And for a for about two years before that, I had a sun.com email
address, too. MySQL has not been an independent company for quite a
while. Google it if you don't b
I deal with a somewhat similar situation. Even though we have fast VPN
connections among our various offices, each has been afflicted with a
different database structure (and software) which they cannot change.
What I suggest you do is use the kind of "pseudo-synchronization" that we do.
Use a
On 8/17/2010 6:02 PM, Anders Kaseorg wrote:
On Wed, 2010-08-11 at 14:23 -0400, Shawn Green (MySQL) wrote:
On 8/9/2010 5:27 PM, Yves Goergen wrote:
What's that supposed to mean? If there's no way to force the connection
into SSL, it is entirely useless. Anyone on the wire could simply
pretend th
26 matches
Mail list logo
