At 02:44 10/17/2012, Claudio Nanni wrote:
>Take a look at TRIGGERS
>
>C.
Thanks Claudio.
I wrote a trigger that MySQL accepted. However, when
I tried to insert a new record:
"Can't update table 'tbl' in stored function/trigger
because it is already used by statement which invoked
this
I tried to install the mysql monitor, but stumbled on some problems.
Here is what I did.
1. Installed a second instance of mysql server on one of our servers into a
different folder rather than into the regular folder because there is
already another instance of mysql server running on the same
thanks amanda... the "local" worked for some reason...
in about 10 years of using mysql i have never had to do that.
i still wonder why would the thing not stat it.
file and dir are both 777 and owned by mysql...
one thing i noticed thou is that the actual user is not mysql but
_mysql. that
>>> as far as i understodd the dameon was NOT down
I tried it both ways.
>> Then what about all the stuff cached in RAM waiting
>> and not yet written to disk?
> exactly this is the problem with making a fs-snapshot
> while mysqld is running - there is no 100% safe way to
> make the snpashot, wr
Am 17.10.2012 18:15, schrieb Rick James:
>
>> as far as i understodd the dameon was NOT down
>
> [Rick James] Then what about all the stuff cached in RAM waiting and not yet
> written to disk?
exactly this is the problem with making a fs-snapshot
while mysqld is running - there is no 100% saf
also try using "load data local infile 'file path' and see if it works
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 10:52 PM, Ananda Kumar wrote:
> does both directory have permission "777"
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 9:27 PM, Rick James wrote:
>
>> SELinux ?
>>
>> > -Original Message-
>> > From: Lixun Pe
does both directory have permission "777"
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 9:27 PM, Rick James wrote:
> SELinux ?
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Lixun Peng [mailto:pengli...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2012 9:03 PM
> > To: kalin
> > Cc: Michael Dykman; mysql@lists.mysql.com
> >
At 02:44 10/17/2012, Claudio Nanni, wrote:
>Take a look at TRIGGERS
>
>C.
>
>PS: I am curious to know why you would do that anyway
Will want this 'AssociatedWith' field to be associated
with an older records' KeyField so I can search for a
group of records by this field.
Start Here to Find
Hello Shawn
Thanks for your tips. We send the " select LAST_INSERT_ID() " by our data
middle ware.
I'll ask the middle ware team to check it out.
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 9:33 PM, Shawn Green wrote:
> Hello Dehua,
>
>
> On 10/17/2012 3:33 AM, Dehua Yang wrote:
>
>> select LAST_INSERT_ID()
> as far as i understodd the dameon was NOT down
[Rick James] Then what about all the stuff cached in RAM waiting and not yet
written to disk?
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
SELinux ?
> -Original Message-
> From: Lixun Peng [mailto:pengli...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2012 9:03 PM
> To: kalin
> Cc: Michael Dykman; mysql@lists.mysql.com
> Subject: Re: error 13
>
> Hi,
>
> you can switch to mysql user "su - mysql", and then stat this file.
> if yo
Check that server_id is different between Master and Slave(s).
Check other settings relating to replication.
> -Original Message-
> From: Kent Ho [mailto:k...@graffiti.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 6:45 AM
> To: mysql@lists.mysql.com; replicat...@lists.mysql.com
> Subject: Unex
Hi,
I have a Mysql replicate setup running for a while over 6 months and recent we
had an outage. We fix it, bought the server back up and we spotted something
peculiar and worrying. The replication logs are growing in size, all of a
sudden on Tuesday 9th Oct based on clues from monitoring g
Hello Dehua,
On 10/17/2012 3:33 AM, Dehua Yang wrote:
select LAST_INSERT_ID() ; Under high concurrency , it would return other
threads value to you.
Incorrect. The results of LAST_INSERT_ID() are connection-specific. The
activity on other connections will not change or alter the value for
- Original Message -
> From: "Reindl Harald"
>
> as far as i understodd the dameon was NOT down
>
> a pretty sure indication was his log:
> 121016 10:40:20 InnoDB: Database was not shut down normally!
> InnoDB: Starting crash recovery.
> InnoDB: Reading tablespace information from the .
Am 17.10.2012 13:30, schrieb Johan De Meersman:
> I agree with the double rsync - I use the same technique - but again, if your
> daemon is down (thus, everything else being equal) a snapshot is just as
> consistent as an rsync, no?
as far as i understodd the dameon was NOT down
a pretty sure
> - Original Message -
> From: "Reindl Harald"
>
> Am 17.10.2012 12:26, schrieb Johan De Meersman:
> >
> > - Original Message -
> >> From: "Reindl Harald"
> >>
> >> i do not trust any FS snapshot in this context
>
> > Why? I am completely unaware of any functional difference
Am 17.10.2012 12:26, schrieb Johan De Meersman:
>
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Reindl Harald"
>>
>> i do not trust any FS snapshot in this context
>
> Why? I am completely unaware of any functional difference between an rsync
> and a snapshot, everything else being equal.
because
- Original Message -
> From: "Reindl Harald"
>
> i do not trust any FS snapshot in this context
Why? I am completely unaware of any functional difference between an rsync and
a snapshot, everything else being equal.
--
Linux Bier Wanderung 2012, now also available in Belgium!
August
Take a look at TRIGGERS
C.
PS: I am curious to know why you would do that anyway
2012/10/17 W. D.
> When creating a record, the first field (KeyField)...
>
> KeyFieldBIGINT UNSIGNED NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT
>
> ...is it possible to copy this auto-generated value into
> another field w
select LAST_INSERT_ID() ; Under high concurrency , it would return other
threads value to you.
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 2:23 PM, W. D. wrote:
> When creating a record, the first field (KeyField)...
>
> KeyFieldBIGINT UNSIGNED NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT
>
> ...is it possible to copy t
21 matches
Mail list logo
