Gurus,
I am going to have a big table with lot of records, to expedite searching i
wanted to index on a key field (which is numeric value). BUT, there will be
records which will have same value for the key field (other columns will be
different).
so how can i do this? right now, i am getting
Am 28.05.2014 21:43, schrieb Rajeev Prasad:
I am going to have a big table with lot of records, to expedite searching i
wanted to index on a key field (which is numeric value). BUT, there will be
records which will have same value for the key field (other columns will be
different).
so
Am 28.05.2014 22:29, schrieb Rajeev Prasad:
I am using phpMyAdmin, i looked closely and found index is this index you
are talking about? (earlier i used Primary).
surely
primary is a uniqe key, honestly consider to read some manuals
My further question is: the index key here is going to
(re-sending, i got err from yahoo)
thx Reindl,
I am using phpMyAdmin, i looked closely and found index is this index you are
talking about? (earlier i used Primary).
My further question is: the index key here is going to be epoch system time. I
currently have it as integer 10. The table will
Am 28.05.2014 22:39, schrieb Rajeev Prasad:
(re-sending, i got err from yahoo)
your previous message made it off-list to me
*don't use reply-all on mailing lists*
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Thank you a lot. The first indexing process finished after about 13
hours, so I think the problem is solved now.
I set the myisam_sort_bufffer_size to 10GB.
For the query I will adjust it to your version.
Am 20.06.2012 23:32, schrieb Rick James:
SELECT ruid1, ruid2, overlap FROM l4_link WHERE
On 20/06/2012 11:45, Christian Koetteritzsch wrote:
Hi guys,
As the title says I'm trying to index 40 billion entries with two indexes on a
server with 16 cores and 128GB RAM. The table is the one below and it is a
myisam table. The *.myd file is about 640GB
Hiya
I am unable to help. But
At 02:04 AM 6/21/2012, you wrote:
Thank you a lot. The first indexing process finished after about 13
hours, so I think the problem is solved now.
I set the myisam_sort_bufffer_size to 10GB.
The first indexing process???
You should have created all of your indexes with one Alter statement
you a lot. The first indexing process finished after about 13
hours, so I think the problem is solved now.
I set the myisam_sort_bufffer_size to 10GB.
The first indexing process???
You should have created all of your indexes with one Alter statement.
Otherwise it will take another 13+ hours
Possibly worse than that, since it will rebuild the 'first' index again.
-Original Message-
From: mos [mailto:mo...@fastmail.fm]
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2012 7:51 AM
To: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: Indexing about 40 Billion Entries
At 02:04 AM 6/21/2012, you wrote:
Thank
)
The temp folder has about 16tb free space.
When I start the indexing process, it copies the 640Gb into a temp file
and then starts with repair with keycache.
On the internet I found that if it says repair with keycache you shold
increase the myisam_max_sort_file_size, but this didn't work.
It still
|
+-**--+---**
-+
8 rows in set (0.00 sec)
The temp folder has about 16tb free space.
When I start the indexing process, it copies the 640Gb into a temp file
and then starts with repair with keycache.
On the internet I found that if it says repair with keycache you shold
increase
are the semantics of the fields?
-Original Message-
From: Ananda Kumar [mailto:anan...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 4:37 AM
To: Christian Koetteritzsch
Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: Indexing about 40 Billion Entries
looks like the value that you give
: Indexing about 40 Billion Entries
looks like the value that you give for myisam_max_sort_size is not
enough for the index creation and hence it doing a REPAIR WITH
KEYCACHE
Use the below query to set the min values required for
myisam_max_sort_size to avoid repair with keycache
select
questions than you can ask them.
Kind regards
Christian
-Original Message-
From: Ananda Kumar [mailto:anan...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 4:37 AM
To: Christian Koetteritzsch
Cc:mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: Indexing about 40 Billion Entries
looks like the value
| nulls_unequal |
| myisam_use_mmap |
OFF |
+---++
8 rows in set (0.00 sec)
The temp folder has about 16tb free space.
When I start the indexing process, it copies the 640Gb
(ruid1, ruid2) will help for AND, but not at all for OR.
-Original Message-
From: Shawn Green [mailto:shawn.l.gr...@oracle.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 2:30 PM
To: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: Indexing about 40 Billion Entries
On 6/20/2012 5:45 AM, Christian
PARTITION shines. (I have not seen such [yet] in your application.)
-Original Message-
From: Christian Koetteritzsch [mailto:ckoetteritz...@e-humanities.net]
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 1:42 PM
To: Rick James
Cc: Ananda Kumar; mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: Indexing about 40 Billion
Thanks Gavin and Joerg, that was very helpful!
-- Jonas
On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 12:44 PM, Joerg Bruehe joerg.bru...@oracle.comwrote:
Hi Neil, all!
Tompkins Neil wrote:
So if you have individual indexes for example field_1, field_2 and
field_3
etc and then perform a search like
WHERE
Message-
From: Tompkins Neil [mailto:neil.tompk...@googlemail.com]
Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 8:54 AM
To: Joerg Bruehe
Cc: [MySQL]
Subject: Re: Indexing question
Jörg
Thanks for the useful reply. Maybe I can EXPLAIN my select queries for
you
to advise if any changes need to be made
Hi!
Neil Tompkins wrote:
Thanks for your reply. So should we create individual indexes on each
field or a multiple column index ??
This question cannot be answered without checking and measuring your
installation. The decision whether to create an index is always an act
of balancing:
- If
Jörg
Thanks for the useful reply. Maybe I can EXPLAIN my select queries for you
to advise if any changes need to be made ?
Regards
Neil
On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Joerg Bruehe joerg.bru...@oracle.comwrote:
Hi!
Neil Tompkins wrote:
Thanks for your reply. So should we create
: Re: Indexing question
Jörg
Thanks for the useful reply. Maybe I can EXPLAIN my select queries for you
to advise if any changes need to be made ?
Regards
Neil
On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Joerg Bruehe joerg.bru...@oracle.comwrote:
Hi!
Neil Tompkins wrote:
Thanks for your reply. So
Message-
From: Tompkins Neil [mailto:neil.tompk...@googlemail.com]
Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 8:54 AM
To: Joerg Bruehe
Cc: [MySQL]
Subject: Re: Indexing question
Jörg
Thanks for the useful reply. Maybe I can EXPLAIN my select queries
for you
to advise if any changes need to be made
11:48 AM
To: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Indexing question
Suppose I wanted to be able to perform queries against three columns of my
table: 'user_id', 'product_id' and 'created'. Most of the time I'll just be
range-selecting records from the table ordering by 'created'. But I may
also
Hi Neil, all!
Tompkins Neil wrote:
So if you have individual indexes for example field_1, field_2 and field_3
etc and then perform a search like
WHERE field_1 = 10
AND field_3 = 'abc'
This wouldn't improve the search ? You have to create a index for all
possible combined field
Thanks for your reply. So should we create individual indexes on each
field or a multiple column index ??
On 3 Oct 2010, at 16:44, Joerg Bruehe joerg.bru...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi Neil, all!
Tompkins Neil wrote:
So if you have individual indexes for example field_1, field_2 and
field_3
Following on from my previous email I have columns containing numbers
which are then used in SUM and MIN/ MAX functions should these be
indexed too ?
On 3 Oct 2010, at 16:44, Joerg Bruehe joerg.bru...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi Neil, all!
Tompkins Neil wrote:
So if you have individual indexes
Suppose I wanted to be able to perform queries against three columns of my
table: 'user_id', 'product_id' and 'created'. Most of the time I'll just be
range-selecting records from the table ordering by 'created'. But I may also
want to select where 'user_id' = something and 'product_id' in (list,
@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Indexing question
Suppose I wanted to be able to perform queries against three columns of my
table: 'user_id', 'product_id' and 'created'. Most of the time I'll just be
range-selecting records from the table ordering by 'created'. But I may also
want to select where 'user_id' = something
muhammad subair wrote:
On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 9:25 PM, Ken D'Ambrosio k...@jots.org wrote:
Hey, all. I'm trying to get indexing -- like, when do you specify an
index name during index creation, is index use implicit or explicit, and,
honestly, how exactly does it work, anyway? I've been
Hey, all. I'm trying to get indexing -- like, when do you specify an
index name during index creation, is index use implicit or explicit, and,
honestly, how exactly does it work, anyway? I've been RTFM'ing, but
haven't found anything that really laid it out in black and white;
usually, they'd
On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 9:25 PM, Ken D'Ambrosio k...@jots.org wrote:
Hey, all. I'm trying to get indexing -- like, when do you specify an
index name during index creation, is index use implicit or explicit, and,
honestly, how exactly does it work, anyway? I've been RTFM'ing, but
haven't
Using version 5.0.6x on RH. The question I have is about the updating of
indexes.
Say I have a table with a primary key and one or more indexes. I run an
INSERT statement by way of a call to mysql_real_query() in the C api. If
that function call returns zero, i.e., indicating success, does that
Using version 5.0.6x on RH. The question I have is about the updating of
indexes.
Say I have a table with a primary key and one or more indexes. I run an
INSERT statement by way of a call to mysql_real_query() in the C api. If
that function call returns zero, i.e., indicating success, does
In the last episode (Jul 26), buf...@biffco.net said:
Using version 5.0.6x on RH. The question I have is about the updating of
indexes.
Say I have a table with a primary key and one or more indexes. I run an
INSERT statement by way of a call to mysql_real_query() in the C api. If
that
mo...@fastmail.fm (mos) writes:
At 12:37 AM 6/25/2009, you wrote:
...
my.cnf based on my-huge.cnf, expanding key_buffer to 8G,
myisam_sort_buffer_size to 256M, and putting tmpdir on the fiber channel
disk.
You mean key_buffer_size don't you and not key_buffer? If you
are using
Subject
Re: Indexing dynamics in MySQL Community Edition 5.1.34
Mike,
I re-posted your Show Status to the group to see if anyone can
offer
a way to speed up the indexing for you.
BTW, you are adding ALL of the indexes to the table using ONE sql
statement
right? And not a separate
/i...@ibmus
06/27/09 09:48 AM
To
mos mo...@fastmail.fm
cc
mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject
Re: Indexing dynamics in MySQL Community Edition 5.1.34
Yes, all the indices are added in one ALTER TABLE statement. Thursday's
incarnation took about 1.5 hours, on a table created from about 8 GB
On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 7:03 AM, Mike Spreitzermspre...@us.ibm.com wrote:
Today's instance finished shortly after I sent the email below. BTW, here
are some specifics on the table (which uses MyISAM). Thursday's instance
has 11 GB of data and 0.78 GB of index. Today's instance has 26 GB of
Who can please tell me what is mean of The db storage is on fiber
channel.?
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 1:05 AM, mos mo...@fastmail.fm wrote:
Mike,
I re-posted your Show Status to the group to see if anyone can offer a
way to speed up the indexing for you.
BTW, you are adding ALL
-Original Message-
From: Moon's Father [mailto:yueliangdao0...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, June 26, 2009 4:12 AM
To: mos
Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: Indexing dynamics in MySQL Community Edition 5.1.34
Who can please tell me what is mean of The db storage is on fiber
channel
[mailto:jschwa...@the-infoshop.com]
Sent: Friday, June 26, 2009 10:22 AM
To: 'Moon's Father'; 'mos'
Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: RE: Indexing dynamics in MySQL Community Edition 5.1.34
-Original Message-
From: Moon's Father [mailto:yueliangdao0...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, June 26
.)
Wow.
Thanks for the help, all!
-Ken
On Wed, June 24, 2009 12:03 pm, Little, Timothy wrote:
To answer your questions in no particular order, YES you can speed it up
with indexing.
You might want to first create an index on ( blocksize AND
physmessage_id ).
Why, you might ask, index
Hi Walter,
Walter Heck - OlinData.com wrote:
Hey Tim, all
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 10:03 AM, Little,
Timothytlit...@thomaspublishing.com wrote:
Why, you might ask, index on physmessage_id? Because then the db won't
have to do a fetch on items from the table since it's in the INDEX
itself,
At 12:37 AM 6/25/2009, you wrote:
Actually, my characterization of the current state is wrong. It appears
that one core is completely busy, I suppose MySQL does this indexing work
in a single thread. Is it reasonable for indexing to be CPU bound?
my.cnf based on my-huge.cnf, expanding
-Original Message-
From: Mike Spreitzer [mailto:mspre...@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 1:38 AM
To: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: Indexing dynamics in MySQL Community Edition 5.1.34
Actually, my characterization of the current state is wrong. It appears
that one core
Mike,
I re-posted your Show Status to the group to see if anyone can offer
a way to speed up the indexing for you.
BTW, you are adding ALL of the indexes to the table using ONE sql statement
right? And not a separate SQL statement to build each index?
Mike
At 02:01 AM 6/25/2009, you
where blocksize 50;
That took 14 seconds. A bit more in my timeframe. Can I optimize this
with indexing? Should I be using a different DB engine? Is there a
site/book I should be learning DBA fundamentals from that might offer me
direction for stuff like this?
Sorry for all the newbie
To answer your questions in no particular order, YES you can speed it up
with indexing.
You might want to first create an index on ( blocksize AND
physmessage_id ).
Why, you might ask, index on physmessage_id? Because then the db won't
have to do a fetch on items from the table since it's
Hey Tim, all
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 10:03 AM, Little,
Timothytlit...@thomaspublishing.com wrote:
Why, you might ask, index on physmessage_id? Because then the db won't
have to do a fetch on items from the table since it's in the INDEX
itself, saving any unnecessary reads.
FYI: That only
|
++--+---+--+-+--+---+-+
OK, so it is still indexing. Then I start up `vmstat` again, and it shows
very different dynamics:
# vmstat 5
procs ---memory-- ---swap-- -io
Actually, my characterization of the current state is wrong. It appears
that one core is completely busy, I suppose MySQL does this indexing work
in a single thread. Is it reasonable for indexing to be CPU bound?
Thanks,
Mike Spreitzer
Mike Spreitzer/Watson/i...@ibmus
06/25/09 01:30 AM
Hi all,
I am looking for, is there any specific reason for not indexing all columns
of a table. whats the impact on the performance. Although indexing is meant
for getting great performance. So, why indexing all columns is not
feasible. (Read in docs that all columns should not be indexed
for not indexing all columns
of a table. whats the impact on the performance. Although indexing is meant
for getting great performance. So, why indexing all columns is not
feasible. (Read in docs that all columns should not be indexed)
--
Krishna Chandra Prajapati
Hi,
Following on from what Mike mentioned, indexing all columns does not
really help as MySQL will at most use one index for a query, so its
important to pick your indexes carefully and consider constructing
composite indexes. An index on a single column may not even be used
due to poor
idx_value (value)
)
On Sat, Sep 6, 2008 at 1:16 AM, ewen fortune [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Following on from what Mike mentioned, indexing all columns does not
really help as MySQL will at most use one index for a query, so its
important to pick your indexes carefully and consider constructing
Mike mentioned, indexing all columns does not
really help as MySQL will at most use one index for a query, so its
important to pick your indexes carefully and consider constructing
composite indexes. An index on a single column may not even be used
due to poor cardinality.
Ewen
On Fri, Sep 5
default '0',
param varchar(128) NOT NULL default '',
value varchar(128) default NULL,
PRIMARY KEY (student_id,param).
KEY idx_value (value)
)
On Sat, Sep 6, 2008 at 1:16 AM, ewen fortune [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Following on from what Mike mentioned, indexing all columns does
'',
value varchar(128) default NULL,
PRIMARY KEY (student_id,param).
KEY idx_value (value)
)
On Sat, Sep 6, 2008 at 1:16 AM, ewen fortune [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi,
Following on from what Mike mentioned, indexing all columns does not
really help as MySQL will at most use
Hi,
I just finished restoring a 22gig SQL dump but the server is not
performing anywhere near where it should be. I'm assuming this is
because it's still rebuilding indexes on the imported tables.
Is there any way to see the indexing status so I can gauge how far
it's got?
Thanks
to see the indexing status so I can gauge how far it's
got?
Thanks.
-Stut
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
assuming this is
because it's still rebuilding indexes on the imported tables.
Is there any way to see the indexing status so I can gauge how far
it's got?
Thanks.
-Stut
Thanks.
-Stut
--
http://stut.net/
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
Hi,
I have created a rather large table containing about 16M records. Most
of the indexed fields are smallint, but there is one field that is a
text field that I am using fulltext indexing on. The total size of the
smallint indexes is only about 30 MB, but the fulltext index brings
the total index
What is the size of the text field you're fulltext indexing? How often is
that index used? You might be best off to create a table containing only
that column and a PK that is equal to the PK in the original table. You
might also keep a portion of the text field (say 50 characters) in the
original
with PK and text field seems to be the only sensible
decision. Thanks in advance,
Christian
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 10:11 AM, Arthur Fuller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What is the size of the text field you're fulltext indexing? How often is
that index used? You might be best off to create a table
-Original Message-
From: Artem Kuchin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2007 1:19 PM
To: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Indexing one byte flags - what implementattion is better
Maybe someone could provide a good resonable
input on this issue.
Let's say i have a table
Maybe someone could provide a good resonable
input on this issue.
Let's say i have a table products
CASE 1:
table: products
id int unsigned not null,
name char(128) not null,
f_new tinyint not null
id - is basically the id of a product
name - is the name of a product
f_new - is a one byte
for CASE 2 you'll need a third object to keep track of the
highest value for id.
-Original Message-
From: Artem Kuchin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2007 1:19 PM
To: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Indexing one byte flags - what implementattion is better
Maybe someone
Hi
I've created a function that return a float value the code for it is :
create function IDR(pin1 varchar(20),pin4 varchar(20),pin6 varchar(20),pin7
varchar(20),pin9 varchar(20),MOL varchar(20)) returns float
DETERMINISTIC
begin
declare output float;
mysql create index AA on precalc (IDR(P1,P4,P6,P7,P9,'HLA-DRB13'));
But i Get the following error:
ERROR 1064 (42000): You have an error in your SQL syntax; check the manual
that corresponds to your MySQL server version for the right syntax to use
near ''P1','P4','P6','P7','P9','HLA-DRB13'))'
Hi
I've created a function that return a float value the code for it is :
create function IDR(pin1 varchar(20),pin4 varchar(20),pin6 varchar(20),pin7
varchar(20),pin9 varchar(20),MOL varchar(20)) returns float
DETERMINISTIC
begin
declare output float;
, as far as i can see, from mysql 5.0 and upper it is possible create
index using functions.
http://www.faqs.org/docs/ppbook/r24254.htm
But i keep having problems with the exemple from the link. Is there any bug
in mysql 5.0.24a-log?
2007/11/13, Martijn Tonies [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
mysql
, as far as i can see, from mysql 5.0 and upper it is possible create
index using functions.
http://www.faqs.org/docs/ppbook/r24254.htm
But i keep having problems with the exemple from the link. Is there any bug
in mysql 5.0.24a-log?
The above website says:
Practical PostgreSQL
I cannot
Hi Cory,
Cory Robin wrote:
Is there a way to only include certain matching conditions
in indexes?
Example if I have a row I want to index that is mysql dates
(2007-06-07) and I only want to include CURRENT and FUTURE
dates in the index and ignore any past dates. Is that
possible at all?
The
On 6/7/07, Cory Robin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The issue I have is that the ratio of queries on old vs.
new data is like 1:10. And searches would be MUCH
faster if I could force my queries that are looking at
current or future data to use an index that ONLY had that
information in them..
Is there a way to only include certain matching conditions
in indexes?
Example if I have a row I want to index that is mysql dates
(2007-06-07) and I only want to include CURRENT and FUTURE
dates in the index and ignore any past dates. Is that
possible at all?
The issue I have is that the
hi,
if I have column order_id(int(4)) null do I have to index it too. I'm
going to use it ONLY for sorting records.
thanks.
-afan
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi Afan,
Afan Pasalic wrote:
hi,
if I have column order_id(int(4)) null do I have to index it too. I'm
going to use it ONLY for sorting records.
It depends a lot on how much data is in the table, etc etc. An index will make sorting
more efficient in the general case when you have a decent
Baron Schwartz wrote:
Hi Afan,
Afan Pasalic wrote:
hi,
if I have column order_id(int(4)) null do I have to index it too. I'm
going to use it ONLY for sorting records.
It depends a lot on how much data is in the table, etc etc. An index
will make sorting more efficient in the general
Hi,
Afan Pasalic wrote:
Baron Schwartz wrote:
Hi Afan,
Afan Pasalic wrote:
hi,
if I have column order_id(int(4)) null do I have to index it too. I'm
going to use it ONLY for sorting records.
It depends a lot on how much data is in the table, etc etc. An index
will make sorting more
Baron Schwartz wrote:
Hi,
Afan Pasalic wrote:
Baron Schwartz wrote:
Hi Afan,
Afan Pasalic wrote:
hi,
if I have column order_id(int(4)) null do I have to index it too.
I'm going to use it ONLY for sorting records.
It depends a lot on how much data is in the table, etc etc. An
index
12:15 AM
To: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Joins versus Grouping/Indexing: Normalization Excessive?
So I'm currently designing a database for a web site and
intra net for my
campuses student radio. Since I'm not getting paid for this
and I'm doing
this in my free time I kinda want to take my
So I'm currently designing a database for a web site and intra net for my
campuses student radio. Since I'm not getting paid for this and I'm doing
this in my free time I kinda want to take my time and have the system setup
as perfectly as any one college student can.
I'm currently debating on
I think you're approaching this from the wrong angle. You'll want to put
the data at the highest level at which it changes.
i.e. If every song on an album is always the same year, put it at the
album level, however, if it changes from song to song on a particular
album, then you want it at
rows and is 75KB big. It runs
extremely slow. I tried to create an index for it but it failed to increase
performance.
Any help is appreciated.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Help-indexing-this-query.-tf3059045.html#a8505554
Sent from the MySQL - General mailing list
performance.
Any help is appreciated.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Help-indexing-this-query.-tf3059045.html#a8505554
Sent from the MySQL - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
.
This `ptsSignups` table contains 82752 rows and is 75KB big. It runs
extremely slow. I tried to create an index for it but it failed to
increase
performance.
Any help is appreciated.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Help-indexing-this-query.-tf3059045.html#a8505554
Sent
and is 75KB big. It runs
extremely slow. I tried to create an index for it but it failed to
increase
performance.
Any help is appreciated.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Help-indexing-this-query.-tf3059045.html#a8505554
Sent from the MySQL - General mailing list archive
is appreciated.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Help-indexing-this-query.-tf3059045.html#a8505554
Sent from the MySQL - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:
http
Hi,
I am facing a peculiar problem.When i execute a query on slave server it
doesn't use indexes that have been created and hence read all the records
present in that table.The same query when execute on Master yields proper
results.The table structure , table types are same.What could be
In the last episode (Jan 06), Himanshu Raina said:
I am facing a peculiar problem.When i execute a query on slave server
it doesn't use indexes that have been created and hence read all the
records present in that table.The same query when execute on Master
yields proper results.The table
I'm guessing that the way MySQL handles foreign language full text
indexing is through parser plug-ins and custom stop word lists. Am I
right? And If so, these must have been already created for the common
western languages such as German, French etc. Where can I find these
plug-ins
Hi Gasper,
MySql allows to package the index - to get its size smaller and to gain
performance.
Some information about that can be found here:
http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2006/05/13/to-pack-or-not-to-pack-myisam-key-compression/
Gaspar Bakos schrieb:
Hi,
RE:
Have you tried
Hello,
There is a table (TEST) with ~100 million records, 70 columns (mostly
integers, some doubles, and a few short fixed char()), and has a ~100Gb
size.
The table has a single (not unique) index on one integer column: MMi.
If I invoke a simple select based on MMi, then the selection is VERY
Questions;
1. Is there a way to decrease random seeks? E.g. mysqld config
parameters, increase some buffer/cache sizes?
2. Optimize table: is there a way to rearrange data so that random
seeks are minimized?
3. If we have to live with large number of random seeks does anyone
know how the
Hi, Philip,
RE:
What is the EXPLAIN output of each?
OK, first I naively typed:
explain create table test2 select * from TEST where MMi 9000;
but of course, this does not work.
The simple select that uses MMi_m as index (and takes up to an hour):
mysql explain select * from TEST where MMi_m
A simple search on google for
mysql fulltext indexing
provided many links, including:
http://jeremy.zawodny.com/blog/archives/000576.html
http://epsilondelta.wordpress.com/2006/02/08/dissecting-mysql-fulltext-indexing/
(overviews of how it works)
and
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en
anyone know where i can get these, will highly appreciate, this is a feature
of mysql 5.0 and my platform is linux.
Mohsen wrote:
But himself solved his problem.
with : mysql_query(SET NAMES utf8);
Even 4.0.x
Wrong.
I decided to prepare two different versions for my software:
- A MySQL 4.0-friendly version using Romanizing method (Hats off to you,
Ehsan)
- A MySQL 4.1-compatible
1 - 100 of 398 matches
Mail list logo
