Does innodb buffer pool cache indexes and data in sub sets or in entirety?
I've heard people mention the buffer pool allocation is dependent on
the size of your tables and indexes.
Kyong
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.
Another thing to keep in mind is to make sure all your foreign keys
are re-created if you have any. We had a similar "accident" in our
prod box a few years back and converting MyIsam to InnoDB won't
necessarily re-create the foreign keys.
Kyong
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 6:39 AM, Johan De Meersman w
I couldn't find much information on innodb_autoinc_lock_mode and
implications on mixed mode replication. Does the same caution for
innodb_autoinc_lock_mode=2 and statement-based replication apply to
mixed mode replication?
Kyong
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql
I've been going through the 5.1 manual and exploring the new features.
To add a secondary index to an existing table, InnoDB scans the table,
and sorts the rows using memory buffers and temporary files in order
by the value(s) of the secondary index key column(s). The B-tree is
then built in key-v
Are there any known issues or challenges implementing MMM?
We're currently focused on MMM but just kinda wanted to keep our eyes open.
Kyong
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 11:19 PM, Rob Wultsch wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 8:42 PM, Kyong Kim wrote:
>>
>> Has anyone use
Has anyone used this in production?
We're looking at this as part of our sharding/scale strategy and
wanted some insight into real world experience.
Are there alternatives out there?
Kyong
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://list
This isn't true for innodb.
I think the only requirement is that you need to have a unique index
on the auto increment column.
We created a composite primary key + auto_increment to take advantage
of clustering by primary key while satisfying unique constraint for
the primary key. It worked out wel
gh on the list of things to scrutinize.
Kyong
On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 12:12 PM, Johan De Meersman wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 8:04 PM, Kyong Kim wrote:
>> If the memory is available, why not use it? It seems like the default
>> buffer pool size out of the box was just never cha
On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 10:57 PM, Machiel Richards wrote:
> Good morning all
>
>
>
> I would like to try and find out how you can see what is using the
> query cache.
>
>
>
> My reason for asking is the following:
>
>
>
> On one of our client databases, the quer
I can see how having innodb_support_xa set to 1 can have write
performance impact due to additional flushes to disk.
Can this impact read performance as well?
Kyong
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=
Yeah. One of the telltale signs of something amiss is excessive swap activity.
You're not going to be happy with the performance when the swap space
is actually in use heavily.
Kyong
On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 8:15 PM, Dan Nelson wrote:
> In the last episode (Apr 13), Joe Hammerman said:
>> My organ
Also, if you have read heavy workload, you might want to try using and
tuning your query cache.
Start off with something like 32M and incrementally tune it.
You can monitor some query cache related server variables.
Kyong
On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 4:28 PM, Rob Wultsch wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 10, 2010
We've seen good results throwing more RAM to the buffer pool.
It is true that InnoDB data never gets accessed directly on disk.
The only downside I know of with a larger buffer pool is slower restarts.
The load speed depends on the order of the inserts.
Random inserts or updates to primary key wil
Also depends on your data access pattern as well.
If you can take advantage of clustering my primary key for your
selects, then InnoDB could do it for you.
My suggestion would be to write some queries based on projected
workload, build 2 tables with lots and lots of data, and do some
isolated testi
Also depends on your data access pattern as well.
If you can take advantage of clustering my primary key for your
selects, then InnoDB could do it for you.
My suggestion would be to write some queries based on projected
workload, build 2 tables with lots and lots of data, and do some
isolated testi
UPDATE, I think this will solve
> the problem with one statement.
>
> Rodrigo Ferreira
>
> --- On *Wed, 3/24/10, Johnny Withers * wrote:
>
>
> From: Johnny Withers
> Subject: Re: SELECT and INSERT if no row is returned
> To: "Kyong Kim"
> Cc: "my
I need to INSERT a row into a table only if it does not exist to
insure that there won't be duplicate rows.
Due to the the usage case and the design of the primary key,
non-unique id + auto increment, I don't think insert ignore is an
option.
What would be simplest and cheapest way to make sure th
I'm not positive if the general log captures all invalid queries but
it does capture at least some.
I was asked the same question a few months back and checking to make
sure that manually issued invalid queries are logged (IIRC).
Could it be that the queries are never even making it to the database
On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 11:23 AM, Keith Murphy wrote:
> You absolutely *should not* convert the mysql database to InnoDB.
>
> Read the above sentence again :)
>
> All others, unless you had a specific reason not to do so, yes, I would
> convert them.
>
> keith
>
> On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 2:18 PM,
> even backwards-comprehend the code using the documentation. Where on earth
> did you learn to code like this? A one-liner at that, even on an 80-column
> terminal.
>
> Thank you very much!
>
> Tim Legg
> --- On Thu, 11/5/09, Kyong Kim wrote:
>
>> From: Kyong Ki
I think you can use update replace.
UPDATE table SET column=REPLACE(column,'$','');
Kyong
On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 1:35 PM, Tim Legg wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am importing CSV data from a proprietary database into a table in MySQL.
> Due to a flaw in the proprietary software's export tool, currency
Raj,
Yup. It's that bug.
I got the row size to below 8K and the insertion takes place fine.
Thanks for pointing me in the right direction.
Kyong
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 10:31 AM, Raj Shekhar wrote:
> Kyong Kim gmail.com> writes:
>
>> For sure all of our columns combined do n
We have an InnoDB table on MySQL 5.0.
We recently encountered an this error during a multirow insert(200 rows).
We identified the data causing it and it's a a series of long strings
exceeding the VARCHAR(255) columns into which they're being inserted.
I've been looking at the InnoDB restriction pag
Is the status information correct?
> mysql Ver 14.12 Distrib 5.0.27, for Win32 (ia32)
Are you using some sort of vm?
Kyong
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 12:23 PM, Lawrence Robertson
wrote:
> Hi.
>
> We have some MySql servers in a circular replication, and one of the servers
> is having some performa
Be careful about burying list type of data in a column.
I've seen poor performance issues parsing lists and XML type data
buried in columns.
A lot depends on your application and how and what you need to query
from those lists.
I've seen a case where a submitted documents were stored in a column
a
A) You would probably want to populate the Article.Article_Type column
with Article_Type.ID. You probably wouldn't need Article_Type table if
you're going to store Article_Type value directly.
I would also consider the use of natural primary key vs surrogate
primary key. We've seen good results wi
- md
>
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 12:25 AM, Kyong Kim wrote:
>> Michael,
>> Yeah. We're trying to maximize the benefits of clustering and had to
>> sacrifice on the length of the primary key.
>> And we got fairly good results from query profiling using maatkit.
>>
e careful with the multi-icolumn primary
> key. Assuming your primary key remains constant over the lifetime of
> the record. I don't think it matters much where you put the
> auto-increment key.
>
> - michael
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 10:00 PM, Kyong Kim wrote:
We have a multi-column primary key with an auto-increment column as
the 3rd column in the primary key in InnoDB.
Is there a requirement to have the auto-increment column as the
leftmost column in the primary key in order for InnoDB to cluster by
the multi-column primary key?
I don't believe this to
We have a composite primary key consisting of
column a, column b, column c. We don't have a lot of variation on
column a and it makes sense for us to cluster by a.
Our queries are
SELECT column c FROM table WHERE column a=something and column e=something.
By creating a composite secondary index on
It's often said that NOT NULL column is preferable in terms of index
performance.
I was wondering exactly why and how this is so specifically to InnoDB.
It would be great if someone can shed light on this matter in some detail.
Kyong
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.m
being able to
grant other users permissions?
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=kimky...@fhda.edu
Kyong Kim
Instructional Multimedia/Web Programmer
Foothill College
12345 El Monte Rd
3601
Los A
> That's why you really need to be more precise in the data structures
> you are planning on using. This can change the results significantly.
>
> So no, I don't have any specific answers to your questions as you don't
> provide any specific information in what you ask.
Yeah. Let me see if I can f
airly important table.
Any insight would be much appreciated.
Kyong
> kimky...@fhda.edu ("Kyong Kim") writes:
>
>> I was wondering about a scale out problem.
>> Lets say you have a large table with 3 cols and 500+ million rows.
>>
>> Would there be much be
I was wondering about a scale out problem.
Lets say you have a large table with 3 cols and 500+ million rows.
Would there be much benefit in splitting the columns into different tables
based on INT type primary keys across the tables? The split tables will be
hosted on a same physical instance but
learly above query accepts only one item in the list. Is there a way to
> do
> > this for multiple items in the list ??? I can't think of anything at this
> > moment.
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -Abhi
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Barney Boisvert
> bboisv.
ort_range 41071
Sort_rows 7353497
Sort_scan 5967
Table_locks_immediate 458067
Table_locks_waited 850
Threads_cached 14
Threads_connected 17
Threads_created 70
Threads_running 2
Uptime 444983
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:
http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=kimky...@fhda.edu
Kyong Kim
Instructional Multimedia/Web Programmer
Foothill College
12345 El Monte Rd
3601
Los Altos Hills, CA 94022
650-949-7091
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
38 matches
Mail list logo
