And this is the innodb file size, does this matter for performance?
$ du -h ibdata*
11G ibdata1
11G ibdata2
11G ibdata3
59G ibdata4
2010/9/22 vokern :
> This is piece of the setting in my.cnf:
>
> set-variable = innodb_buffer_pool_size=4G
> set-variable = innodb_additional_mem_p
This is piece of the setting in my.cnf:
set-variable = innodb_buffer_pool_size=4G
set-variable = innodb_additional_mem_pool_size=20M
set-variable = innodb_flush_log_at_trx_commit=2
set-variable =
innodb_data_file_path=ibdata1:10G;ibdata2:10G;ibdata3:10G;ibdata4:10G:autoextend
key_buffer
Thank you so much Chris.
But is this mean that myisam table stores integer very differntly and
inefficiently than InnoDB table?
I see that oid can be ommitted. But in the case that I like to query
on ordinal number of the prime. oid can make things faster, am i right?
seperate the storage for de
>-Original Message-
>From: Tompkins Neil [mailto:neil.tompk...@googlemail.com]
>Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2010 11:48 AM
>To: Johan De Meersman
>Cc: [MySQL]
>Subject: Re: SELECT WHERE IN help
>
>Thanks for the reply. The search of (3,4,5,6,7,3) is pulling data from a
>table. I think i
Hi Neil, all!
Tompkins Neil wrote:
> Hi
>
> With a SELECT * FROM my_table WHERE record_id IN (3,4,5,6,7,3), how can I
> return two records for the record_id 3 ? Is it possible ?
This is a case where you may safely use natural language and logic. The
command is
SELECT all fields FROM the rec
On 21/09/2010 16:44, Tompkins Neil wrote:
Thanks for the quick reply. Basically in (3,4,5,6,7,3) the record_id of 3
only exists once in the table my_table. However, because 3 exists twice
within (3,4,5,6,7,3), I want it to return two records for record_id 3. Is
it possible ?
No, that isn't
Thanks for the reply. The search of (3,4,5,6,7,3) is pulling data from a
table. I think in this case I need to change my design .
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 4:46 PM, Johan De Meersman wrote:
> I don't think that'll work, no. Why would you want to return duplicate data
> ? The whole point of an R
I don't think that'll work, no. Why would you want to return duplicate data
? The whole point of an RDBMS is to *avoid* duplicate data :-)
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 5:44 PM, Tompkins Neil wrote:
> Thanks for the quick reply. Basically in (3,4,5,6,7,3) the record_id of 3
> only exists once in the
Thanks for the quick reply. Basically in (3,4,5,6,7,3) the record_id of 3
only exists once in the table my_table. However, because 3 exists twice
within (3,4,5,6,7,3), I want it to return two records for record_id 3. Is
it possible ?
Cheers
Neil
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 4:40 PM, Johan De Meers
If there are two, you will return two.
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 5:33 PM, Tompkins Neil wrote:
> Hi
>
> With a SELECT * FROM my_table WHERE record_id IN (3,4,5,6,7,3), how can I
> return two records for the record_id 3 ? Is it possible ?
>
> Cheers
> Neil
>
--
Bier met grenadyn
Is als mosterd
Hi
With a SELECT * FROM my_table WHERE record_id IN (3,4,5,6,7,3), how can I
return two records for the record_id 3 ? Is it possible ?
Cheers
Neil
Hi,
Check your slow queries first. Large full scans can cause unwanted disk
io. Do you use MyISAM or InnoDB? From your status, you seem to have
intensive MyISAM locking.
Peter
On 09/21/2010 04:10 PM, Johan De Meersman wrote:
Also, mailing list doesn't want to distribute attachments :-) Here
Also, mailing list doesn't want to distribute attachments :-) Here's a link
to the metrics view I was on about earlier:
http://www.tuxera.be/mysqlstats.zip
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Johan De Meersman wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 4:03 PM, wrote:
>
>> Quoting Johan De Meersman :
>>
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 4:03 PM, wrote:
> Quoting Johan De Meersman :
>
>> Your raid controller is "lying" to you - you can't have RAID10 with just
>> two
>> disks :-p Don't worry about that, though - it's a good enough config.
>>
>
> Good enough? If he is genuinely saturating the disk with IO (a
Quoting Johan De Meersman :
Your raid controller is "lying" to you - you can't have RAID10 with just two
disks :-p Don't worry about that, though - it's a good enough config.
Good enough? If he is genuinely saturating the disk with IO (as he
states the problem is IO) then it isnt good enoug
Mysql tuner is a very useful tool to pull metrics
http://blog.mysqltuner.com/
On 09/21/2010 05:48 AM, Jangita wrote:
> I find this quite good
>
> http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/
>
> Send your my.cnf and maybe we could look at it and pick anything that would
> help.
>
>
> Jangita | +254 76
>>>
>>> The disk is exactly Raid10.
>>> The CPU is two 2.5G*4, totally 16G memory.
>>>
>
> Two disks with SAS driver, 15K rpm.
>
RAID-10 with 2 disks? or do you mean RAID0 or RAID1???
Can't see how you would get RAID10, minimum of 6 disks for that, no?
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list ar
Quoting vokern :
Two disks with SAS driver, 15K rpm.
Ok so you have fast disks, but with only 2 disks it is normal you will
be quite restricted by DISK IO. By adding more in multiples of 2 and
stripping across all you achieve RAID1+0 and higher max IO...
Andy.
--
MySQL General Mail
2010/9/21 :
> Quoting vokern :
>
>>
>> The disk is exactly Raid10.
>> The CPU is two 2.5G*4, totally 16G memory.
>>
>
> And how many disks do you have, and what type (SATA/SAS/FC etc) what RPM? To
> improve IO you can add more disks, or upgrade to faster disks.
>
>
Two disks with SAS driver, 15K
Thank you all for the kind helps.
I will check them and if still have problems I will come back.
2010/9/21 Machiel Richards :
>
> http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2006/09/29/what-to-tune-in-mysql-server-after-installation/
>
>
> http://www.mysql.com/why-mysql/performance/
>
> http://www.debian
Quoting vokern :
The disk is exactly Raid10.
The CPU is two 2.5G*4, totally 16G memory.
And how many disks do you have, and what type (SATA/SAS/FC etc) what
RPM? To improve IO you can add more disks, or upgrade to faster disks.
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://l
I find this quite good
http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/
Send your my.cnf and maybe we could look at it and pick anything that would
help.
Jangita | +254 76 918383 | MSN & Y!: jang...@yahoo.com
Skype: jangita | GTalk: jangita.nyag...@gmail.com
-Original Message-
From: vokern [mai
2010/9/21 :
> If its an IO problem the first and easiest thing to do is (probably) look at
> your disk subsystem. You can easily achieve higher disk IO by increasing the
> number of disks and implementing something like RAID1+0. What is your
> current disk configuration?
>
The disk is exactly Rai
If its an IO problem the first and easiest thing to do is (probably)
look at your disk subsystem. You can easily achieve higher disk IO by
increasing the number of disks and implementing something like
RAID1+0. What is your current disk configuration?
Andy.
--
MySQL General Mailing Li
Yep. There's rather extensive documentation on http://www.mysql.com. You'll
need to read it and compare to the metrics you're taking off your own
server, draw conclusions and apply them to your setup.
You *are* pulling metrics, aren't you, and not hoping for some magic wand to
make it all happen ?
Yes we have changed some arguments in my.cnf like key_buffer_size,
sort_buffer_size etc.
2010/9/21 Machiel Richards :
> Good day
>
> There is quite a lot of documentation available for MySQL performance
> management.
>
> However, a quick question on this matter. Have you changed any
Hello,
We are using mysql-5.1 with innodb engine for a web 2.0 application.
But we found that the performance is not that good, i.e, the IO load
sometime is high, the query is timeout.
We run ubuntu server Linux, with apt-get for installing mysql.
So is there any good document for improving mysql
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 12:49 PM, Willy Mularto wrote:
> Hi,
> I got this result on InnoDB Buffer Pool Status:
> Free pages 1
> Dirty pages 2,040
> Pages containing data 31,359
> Pages to be flushed 457,083,205
> Busy pages 1,408
>
> Read requests 31,348,288,497
> Write requ
Willy Mularto wrote:
> Hi,
> I got this result on InnoDB Buffer Pool Status:
> Free pages1
> Dirty pages 2,040
> Pages containing data 31,359
> Pages to be flushed 457,083,205
> Busy pages1,408
>
> Read requests 31,348,288,497
> Write requests7,913,407,934
> Read
Hi,
I got this result on InnoDB Buffer Pool Status:
Free pages 1
Dirty pages 2,040
Pages containing data 31,359
Pages to be flushed 457,083,205
Busy pages 1,408
Read requests 31,348,288,497
Write requests 7,913,407,934
Read misses 39,736,110
Write waits 0
Read misses
30 matches
Mail list logo
