Hi Rafal,
If there are more slow queries in your server and logging them into a table
will increase the IO of the server.
It is better to be in a file. The slow query log file can be processed
easily by
pt-query-digesthttp://www.percona.com/doc/percona-toolkit/2.1/pt-query-digest.html
.
Hi all.
I write a script to delete rows from slow_log older than 2 weeks.
#!/bin/bash
if [ $# -ne 1 ]; then
echo Usage: $0 mysql_config_file
exit 1
fi
SELECTQUERY=select * from slow_log where start_time
DATE_ADD(NOW(),INTERVAL - 2 WEEK)
DELETEQUERY=delete from slow_log where start_time
Alternatively, you can copy the data into another table easily:
http://www.bitbybit.dk/carsten/blog/?p=115
Best,
/ Carsten
On 14.05.2012 09:34, P.R.Karthik wrote:
Hi Rafal,
If there are more slow queries in your server and logging them into a table
will increase the IO of the server.
It is
-Original Message-
From: Andrés Tello [mailto:mr.crip...@gmail.com]
Sent: May 12, 2012 10:08 AM
To: mysql
Subject: Mysql is toying me... why sometimes an insert or update can be
slow!? I getting bald cuz this
While doning a batch process...
show full processlist show:
| 544
- Original Message -
From: Baron Schwartz ba...@xaprb.com
Bugs Fixed
* Security Fix: Bug #64884 was fixed.
* Security Fix: Bug #59387 was fixed.
Anyone want to elaborate on the nature or severity of the security
problem? Both are private / inaccessible to me.
Alternatively, you could use MySQL Enterprise Monitor (Oracle) and capture the
queries for very easy analysis.
I have found it very effective, especially when you have very high number of
queries per second.
I have not noticed any impact on database performance.
David.
-Original
- Original Message -
From: Rick James rja...@yahoo-inc.com
If you have 14 partitions in each of 390 tables, and if you have most
of the tables 'active', then you are possibly thrashing in the
table_open_cache.
A distinct possibility.
Compute (SHOW STATUS):
Opened_tables / Uptime
Upscene Productions is celebrating it's 10 year anniversary with a massive
discount on all our products: 70% discount until the end of May.
Don't forgot to blog and twitter about this!
We produce database development, management and testing tools for:
* Oracle
* Microsoft SQL Server
* MySQL
*
is accountid a number or varchar column
On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 7:38 PM, Andrés Tello mr.crip...@gmail.com wrote:
While doning a batch process...
show full processlist show:
| 544 | prod | 90.0.0.51:51262 | tmz2012 | Query |6 |
end | update `account` set
- Original Message -
From: Baron Schwartz ba...@xaprb.com
Because it can be resolved by rolling back just one of them. Why
destroy ALL the work people are trying to accomplish, if you could
just throw away some of it?
What I fail to understand, Baron, is how there can be a deadlock
On 5/13/2012 6:53 PM, Brown, Charles wrote:
I'm trying to install multiple instances of mysql on windows 7,
64bit. 3hrs into the job, I'm not making progress. Does anyone have an idea?
1) The installers are designed to work on single-instance installs or
upgrades.
2) You only need one
Going on a limb here...: I believe I have occurred similar issue (i.e. two
transactions go into an indefinite wait).Though, very infrequent
occurrence.
My only explanation at that time was that there is some loophole when the
deletes/inserts had some impact also on the table indexes. In
- Original Message -
From: Hiromichi Watari hiromichiwat...@yahoo.com
I uploaded the technology whitepaper to the website.
Hmm, interesting idea, to allocate a thread per table - I can imagine it's
going to be pretty heavy on the thread cache, though :-) How does it respond to
not actually , first partition to have been dropped is no longer in use
,we dropped partition from old - new
2012/5/14 Johan De Meersman vegiv...@tuxera.be
- Original Message -
From: Rick James rja...@yahoo-inc.com
If you have 14 partitions in each of 390 tables, and if you
Yes, I'm using indexes, accountid is the primary key, and is numeric and
autoincrement. The process doing the deadlock is no longer done...
The structure of the inserted database has changed.
Originaly it was a single table with 219millions rows, now I partitioned
the hable in... 60 tables, 1
If numeric, then why are u using quotes. With quotes, mysql will ignore the
index and do a full table scan
On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 7:31 PM, Andrés Tello mr.crip...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, I'm using indexes, accountid is the primary key, and is numeric and
autoincrement. The process doing the
Bugs Fixed
* Security Fix: Bug #64884 was fixed.
* Security Fix: Bug #59387 was fixed.
Anyone want to elaborate on the nature or severity of the security
problem? Both are private / inaccessible to me.
Bug #64884 was apparently also applicable to, and fixed in 5.5.24 -
would be
- Original Message -
From: Ananda Kumar anan...@gmail.com
If numeric, then why are u using quotes. With quotes, mysql will
ignore the index and do a full table scan
Will it? Common sense dictates that it would convert to the column's native
type before comparing; and a quick explain
Argh. I meant to send this to the list but it doesn't have the
reply-to set as I expect... the usual gripe
On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 10:46 AM, Baron Schwartz ba...@xaprb.com wrote:
Johan,
On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 9:27 AM, Johan De Meersman vegiv...@tuxera.be wrote:
What I fail to understand,
- Original Message -
From: Govinda govinda.webdnat...@gmail.com
1.) Is anyone *who knows what he is doing* still using
mysql_real_escape_string()? Ever?
I seem to vaguely remember someone showing me some code that would bypass
escaping; but I didn't really pay a lot of attention,
I used to have these issues in mysql version 5.0.41.
On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 8:13 PM, Johan De Meersman vegiv...@tuxera.bewrote:
- Original Message -
From: Ananda Kumar anan...@gmail.com
If numeric, then why are u using quotes. With quotes, mysql will
ignore the index and do a
Am 14.05.2012 16:50, schrieb Johan De Meersman:
- Original Message -
From: Govinda govinda.webdnat...@gmail.com
1.) Is anyone *who knows what he is doing* still using
mysql_real_escape_string()? Ever?
I seem to vaguely remember someone showing me some code that would bypass
In my experience if you have a poor designed code that run the same query
for hundreds or thousands of times in a very short timespan (like some
programmers do in for-loop instead of using a IN for example) you can put
mysql on its knees, in some cases it may be the practical implementation of
Alternatively, you could use MySQL Enterprise Monitor (Oracle) and capture the
queries for very easy analysis.
I have found it very effective, especially when you have very high number of
queries per second.
In turning on this capture, I have not noticed any impact on database
performance.
- Original Message -
From: Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net
but what about the dramatical reduced query-cache hits i see
in some peace of software switching to prepared statements?
dbmail2 as example had around 300 sql-actions per second
dbmail3 using prepared statements
Claudio, would you please extend the example to the use of in?
On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 10:08 AM, Claudio Nanni claudio.na...@gmail.comwrote:
In my experience if you have a poor designed code that run the same query
for hundreds or thousands of times in a very short timespan (like some
Andrés,
with pleasure.
Imagine a website that is used to search, just for example, hotel rooms for
booking.
It is possible that a programmer would:
1) issue a select that returns the IDs the rooms matching the criteria
2) do a loop in the code scanning each ID of the resultset and for each ID
What you do recommend in place of mysql_real_escape_string()?
-Original Message-
From: Govinda [mailto:govinda.webdnat...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2012 7:34 AM
To: Johan De Meersman
Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: MySQL Community Server 5.1.63 has been released
Note that in many (too many) cases, _all_ partitions are opened, even if only
one is really needed.
-Original Message-
From: louis liu [mailto:yloui...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2012 7:02 AM
To: Johan De Meersman
Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com; Rick James
Subject: Re: drop
Hi all,
We are currently designing a database for our application (python/mysql)
and we have some performance concern:
We would have users and images.
users can view some images.
images can be viewed by several users.
(n to m mapping)
Which would be most efficient practice (regarding speed)?
We
Am 14.05.2012 23:05, schrieb Nicolas Rannou:
*1* to create 3 tables:*
user - info about a user
images - info about an image
user_image_mapping
*2* to create 2 tables*
user - info about a user
- a field would contain a list which represents the ids of the images
the user can look at?
... WHERE id IN (...) -- This will (I think) sort the IN list. Therefore, if
two queries have the same (or overlapping) IN values, there cannot be a
deadlock. (I am assuming nothing else being touched.)
If, on the other hand, you try to get a list of rows by other means, and the
order of the
What language are you working in? (Not all have binding)
PREPARE might be using mysql_real_escape_string behind the scenes. :(
Caching too much of the prepare would defeat one important feature of
MySQL: It's ability to use a different query plan when given different
constants.
33 matches
Mail list logo
