Thanks Alexey,
This is enough explanation for me ;)
Cheers,
HMax
AP> I have a question regarding the slow queries log, and queries not using
index.
AP> I have a small table, with say 10 entries, like that :
AP> ID | Element
AP> -
AP> 1 | One
AP> 2 | Two
AP&
is a WHERE, ORDER or GROUP/HAVING clause ?
Also, is it better to do :
SELECT ID, Element FROM tblentries;
or
SELECT ID, Element FROM tblentries WHERE ID > 0;
(In this last case, it won't be logged in the slow query log beause it uses an
index...)
Thank you,
HMax
--
MySQL General Mai
are joined.
> (see: http://dev.mysql.com/doc/mysql/en/explain.html )
> You may post here your EXPLAIN results.
>
> Also note that when you use the second query (B), you also spend time on
> the SQL1 query that you didn't consider about its time.
>
> -Eli
>
>
>
for A, and 0.05s for B.
Can anybody explain this behavior, and maybe offer some advices on
optimizing our queries.
Thanks
--
HMax
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
re of without any results.
Any help would be appreciated!
Thanks
--
HMax
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
One last question, maybe :)
Is there any way to empty the key buffer once the server is started ?
That would be handy :)
Thanks
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 11:13:29 +0100, HMax <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi again,
>
> I worked on the problem and found a way to make the LOAD INDEX IN
:46:13 +0100, Sergei Golubchik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Feb 21, HMax wrote:
> > Thank you for your answer Sergei,
> >
> > It's all clear now, and I'm glad to know where the problem comes from.
> >
> > Now if I understand correctly, my
nlightment
On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 17:41:40 +0100, Sergei Golubchik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Feb 21, HMax wrote:
> > So this means we cannot combine both FULLTEXT and classical indexes if
> > we want to use a LOAD INDEX INTO CACHE, and that we won't ever
AD INDEX, it
doesn't work. Is there really no workaround ? We have for about 1.5Go
of fulltext indexes and if they were in cache, this would speed up
things so much !
Thx for your advices
HMax
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 18:01:29 +0200, Gleb Paharenko
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello.
Hello there.
OK I'll paste the results of commands you asked right after my reply,
because we found out where the problem comes from.
The myisamchk command showed that the index on the VarChar has a block
size of 2048 instead of 1024. However, when I turn this index to a
FULLTEXT one, the block si
Hello there,
We have a problem with the LOAD INDEX INTO CACHE command which is
supposed to be fixed in version 4.1.10
It may be fixed, but then we don't get the way to make it work.
We want to load all the indexes of one of our big table into the main key cache.
This table is myISAM, and has all
11 matches
Mail list logo
