Gary Huntress wrote:
David Logan wrote:
mos wrote:
At 09:27 PM 3/31/2006, you wrote:
I have been offering free database hosting for over 4 years and I've
been doing it on a shoestring.My last MySQL server was a generic
1GHz system with 256MB RAM running Redhat 9. The performance
Innodb is indeed row level locking. You are likely thinking of BDB
which uses memory page level locking.
gw
sheeri kritzer wrote:
Innodb is not row-level locking -- it's memory-page-level-locking. A
memory page is usually small, so it's almost like row-level locking,
but not quite. Perhaps
RV Tec wrote:
Folks,
I'm used to run MySQL (4.0) with OpenBSD (3.7). Now I've decided to give
Linux a shot, to see if I could gain some serious performance. The
server I'm using is a dual Opteron 246, with 2GB RAM, LSI MegaRAID 320.
CentOS 4.1 x86_64 seems to be a good OS.
Although I
Filesystem buffering?
pow wrote:
Hi everyone,
Im puzzling over why a query loads faster the second time I execute it.
I am sure it is not query cached, because that is off.
I also made sure that the key that is used was already cached b4 i even
executed the query the first time. So it is not
Jeff Smelser wrote:
On Thursday 09 June 2005 01:26 pm, George L. Sexton wrote:
Another limitation in MySQL is that you can only have one timestamp column
with a default of CURRENT_TIMESTAMP.
How many friggin times do I have to say that this is not an issue with 4.1 and
above? Which, BTW,
Jay Blanchard wrote:
[snip]
On Wednesday 08 June 2005 11:16 am, you wrote:
[snip]
Thats funny.. looks like it will be added to 5.1.. Dunno why they
think
fixing
it is adding a feature..
[/snip]
The best open-source database on the market today? Free
Constant improvements to database? Free
They do use indexes if you use them to build derived tables and are
pretty fast. The only case where I see them not using indexes when I
think they should is when you use a sub-query for an IN() clause.
Kevin Burton wrote:
OK...
Subqueries in 4.1 are totally broken. They don't use indexes.
Hmmm, I downloaded source and compiled, and had an instant segfault.
Rolled back to 4.1.11. I assumed it was something funky w/ my compile,
but after reading all the above posts ... ???
Mark Matthews wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Donny Simonton wrote:
I'm not sure but I
Donny Simonton wrote:
With Mysql you should ONLY use RAID10. Everything else is not worth your
time.
I would argue that a large stripe (RAID0) would be a better solution for
slaves in a large replicant network. Why waste the drive space and
performance on a RAID10 when you have multiple
Newer SATA drives are supporting command queueing, which should really
help their performance. I think when SATA-2 becomes more available,
SATA will start being a more viable choice and start rivaling SCSI
performance.
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives:
Care to share any secrets? You guys are running Suse w/ 2.4 kernel yes?
Any specifics as far as kernel/glibc/gcc versions. Are you running
mysql 4.1.*? Are you using NPTL? You using the binary from mysql, or
building yourself? Are you running Innodb or Myisam. You mentioned
reiserfs
I am all in favor of this idea. Currently, this info is scattered all
over the web, and finding it can be time consuming (even w/ Google). I
see lots of people jumping the same hurdles, so a central location for
this info seems it would greatly benefit the community.
Greg
Kevin Burton wrote:
Kevin Burton wrote:
Greg Whalin wrote:
I suspect this is an OS issue. Our Opteron's were completing large
data update queries aprox 2-3 times slower than our Xeons when running
under 2.6. After a switch to 2.4, Opteron's are faster than the
Xeons. I mentioned NPTL being shut off
Kevin Burton wrote:
Greg Whalin wrote:
We are currently running 2.3.2 (Fedora Core 1) on our Opterons. When
we were still running linux 2.6, we were on 2.3.3 (Fedora Core 2).
Yeah... we were being bitten by 2.3.2's NPTL implementation for MONTHs
before I heard a rumor that the Internet Archive
, Greg Whalin wrote:
What drives are you using? For SCSI RAID, you definitly want deadline
scheduler. That said, even after the switch to deadline, we saw our
Opteron's running way slow (compared to older slower Xeons). Whatever
the problem is, we fought it for quite a while (though difficult
We have seen the exact same thing here. We used the deadline scheduler
and saw an immediate improvement. However, we still saw much worse
performance on our Opteron's (compared to our older Xeon boxes). We
ended up rolling back to Fedora Core 1 2.4.22-1.2199.nptlsmp kernel and
shut down
Kevin Burton wrote:
Greg Whalin wrote:
We have seen the exact same thing here. We used the deadline
scheduler and saw an immediate improvement. However, we still saw
much worse performance on our Opteron's (compared to our older Xeon
boxes). We ended up rolling back to Fedora Core 1
2.4.22
/ production dbs) and ended up rolling back to 2.4.
Kevin Burton wrote:
Kevin Burton wrote:
Greg Whalin wrote:
Deadline was much faster. Using sysbench:
test:
sysbench --num-threads=16 --test=fileio --file-total-size=20G
--file-test-mode=rndrw run
So... FYI. I rebooted with elevator=deadline
We have noticed this as well and it is really pretty shoddy. It seems
that when using IN( SELECT ), they treat it as ANY() which does a
full table scan.
Only way we have found to get fast performance out of subqueries is to
use the derived table format and join with the derived table.
Just found and read this study:
http://www.distlab.dk/badger/Publications/report0403.ps
and was curious to see if anyone has any additional thoughts as to the
contents?
Greg
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:
Rich Lafferty wrote:
On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 02:38:46PM +0200, DebugasRu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Probably fsync() had failed to flush some part of a 16 kB page to
disk.
so what ? one of trade-offs would be to re-read the data from the disk
and compare it with what it should be (another copy on
Heikki Tuuri wrote:
A journaling file system like ReiserFS does not help if fsync does not
work. A journaling file system itself is actually a bit like a
transactional database. A broken fsync might cause bad damage there.
I would be happy if users tested the 'pull-the-plug' performance of
Rich Lafferty wrote:
On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 09:10:32AM -0500, Greg Whalin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Exactly. No ACID database can ensure integerity in such a situation.
Postgres, Oracle, or any other transactional DB would have suffered the
same fate in these two cases (LiveJournal, Wiki
What are pros/cons as far as performance, reliability, and ease of
backup/restore?
Anyone have any experience running Innodb on raw partition?
Any thoughts as to best filesystem for Innodb? What about pros/cons of
journaled filesystems when in use with Innodb (i.e. transactions)?
How do the
Many data centers do not allow customers to install their own UPS inside
the rack. I am not sure if this is the case with Wikipedia, but it is
definitely the case at the data center we are hosted in. I would love
to shove one in after reading the horror stories at Livejournal and now
I was under the impression that fsync() was only buggy in Linux in the
2.4 kernels. Is it still problematic in 2.6 series?
Greg
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Meetup.com
Heikki Tuuri wrote:
Peter,
a buggy fsync() in Linux is one of the possible reasons here. If an
InnoDB tablespace gets corrupt in a
Daniel Kasak wrote:
Greg Whalin wrote:
Many data centers do not allow customers to install their own UPS
inside the rack. I am not sure if this is the case with Wikipedia,
but it is definitely the case at the data center we are hosted in. I
would love to shove one in after reading the horror
I have 2 dual proc opterons and also have not seen this using MyISAM
(4.1.9), however, I have been less than impressed with mysql on opteron
(using the x86-64 binary from their site). Performance is generally
less than that of our remaining old 32 bit dual proc xeon machines (all
our db
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/mysql/en/innodb-auto-increment-column.html
Rishi Daryanani wrote:
Hi,
My database is mostly made up of MyIsam tables, and some InnoDB tables.
One particular Innodb table works fine with an auto increment field.
The table is updated often, records being added and deleted at
Jochem van Dieten wrote:
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 11:11:05 -0500, Robert Alexander wrote:
Each language is going to have its own personality. If they all did
things the same way, we wouldn't have the wealth of different ones to
choose from.
DBMS's are not languages, they are implementations.
Might
Tucker, Gabriel wrote:
Anil
Write a script that does a slave status and check if either of the threads are
running. You could
further check for error numbers and descriptions. This is what we do.
Gabe
-Original Message-
From: Anil Doppalapudi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday,
We also use Linux Virtual Server for load balancing, but only on our
read-only cluster. Our current levels of RW traffic do not demand more
than one machine.
Russell E Glaue wrote:
We have fail-over using Linux Virtual Server, now upgrading to Red Hat
Cluster Suite. We do not implement
Frank Febbraro wrote:
The MySQL-client is 4.1.7, too?
Yes
The localhost mysql command is version 4.1.7-standard
The remote query browser is version 1.1.1 gamma
The remote JDBC driver is version 3.0.16-ga
Are you seeing the slowdown only from your java app? Or from all clients?
In the changelog
Got me then?! I am still running 4.0.22. Waiting for the connecter/J
to come out of gamma and for 4.1.* to stabilize a bit, so I can't offer
much other than what I have read.
Frank Febbraro wrote:
Are you seeing the slowdown only from your java app? Or from all clients?
I see this slowdown
comments? Does this make sense to people? Any
better ideas? I can say that this works, whereas the default does not.
Meaning, I am able to take a snapshot, and build a new replicant off
of that using the data retrieved from (record_log_pos).
Greg
--
Greg Whalin
Meetup.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED
Ronan Lucio wrote:
Jeff,
Actually, Ive never had such problem.
Im just afraid of it because Ive read some issues about corruption
in MySQL tables and the own MySQL Manual says that exist a command
just to repair MyISAM tables (myisamchk -
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/mysql/en/Table_maintenance.html).
36 matches
Mail list logo
