Today I needed to split a mysqldump -A into it several databases.
I didn't have access to the original source, so I only had the texr file to
work.
It was a webhosting server dump, so there was a LOT of databases...
I split the file with this little script I made:
file=myqdl dump file
nextTable=
I may have missed what you are trying to do here. NoSQL is really a bad name
and should really be renamed to NoREL instead. NoSQL implementations are not
used just because of limitations of traditional RDBMS when it comes to sheer
traffic volume, they are also used because they scale horizontally
On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 9:45 PM, Kiss Dániel n...@dinagon.com wrote:
offset + increment thingy is good if you know in advance that you'll have a
limited number of servers. But if you have no idea that you will have 2,
20,
or 200 servers in your array in the future, you just can't pick an
This is actually more for failover scenarios where databases are spread in
multiple locations with unreliable internet connections. But you want to
keep every single location working even when they are cut off from the other
databases. The primary purpose is not load distribution.
On Mon, Sep 13,
Hmm, that's a very interesting scenario, indeed.
One bad connection will break the chain, though, so in effect you'll be
multiplying the disconnecting rate...
I think you'd be better of with a star topology, but MySQL unfortunately
only allows ring-types. This is gonna require some good thinking
I could be way off here, but how about letting your unique id be a
calculated column of the the server's MAC address concatenated with an
auto-increment id column?
I hope this helps...
~~Fish~~
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 7:26 AM, Johan De Meersman vegiv...@tuxera.bewrote:
Hmm, that's a very
I had some coffee and realized that actually, using a UUID might be
something to look at. There have been quite a few discussions about using a
UUID as a unique id and it does have some gotchas. Just Google: mysql uuid
Have a great day
~~Fish~~
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 7:30 AM, Fish
Hell, yeah. :)
Actually, the ID system I described below works quite well according to my
tests. I feel very comfortable with it both from primary key size and
dynamically increasable database number point of views.
What I actually don't like in it is the concatenated unique ID (ID + SID)
pairs.
Well, thanks, but I'm afraid using UUID's (even with hex compression) is
kind of a suicide, when it comes to performance.
This is a good summary about the issues:
http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2007/03/13/to-uuid-or-not-to-uuid/
So, some kind of auto_increment or sequencing must be the
-Original Message-
From: Kiss Dániel [mailto:n...@dinagon.com]
Sent: Sunday, September 12, 2010 1:47 PM
To: mysql@lists.mysql.com; replicat...@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Unique ID's across multiple databases
Hi,
I'm designing a master-to-master replication architecture.
I wonder what
-Original Message-
From: vegiv...@gmail.com [mailto:vegiv...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Johan De
Meersman
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2010 7:27 AM
To: Kiss Dániel
Cc: Max Schubert; mysql@lists.mysql.com; replicat...@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: Unique ID's across multiple databases
Hmm
-Original Message-
From: Kiss Dániel [mailto:n...@dinagon.com]
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2010 11:49 AM
To: Jerry Schwartz
Cc: Johan De Meersman; Max Schubert; mysql@lists.mysql.com;
replicat...@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: Unique ID's across multiple databases
Well, not exactly.
I do
Schubert; mysql@lists.mysql.com;
replicat...@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: Unique ID's across multiple databases
Well, not exactly.
I do not own all the databases. Some of them are placed at customers, some
of them are at my data warehouse. So, neither NAS or Fibre Channel is a
solution
Schwartz
Cc: Johan De Meersman; Max Schubert; mysql@lists.mysql.com;
replicat...@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: Unique ID's across multiple databases
Well, not exactly.
I do not own all the databases. Some of them are placed at customers, some
of them are at my data warehouse. So, neither NAS
From: Kiss Dániel [mailto:n...@dinagon.com]
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2010 3:17 PM
To: Jerry Schwartz
Cc: Johan De Meersman; Max Schubert; mysql@lists.mysql.com;
replicat...@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: Unique ID's across multiple databases
Well, that would be the plan, yes. :-)
Anyway, I'll
-Original Message-
From: Kiss Dániel [mailto:n...@dinagon.com]
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2010 5:59 AM
Well, thanks, but I'm afraid using UUID's (even with hex
compression) is
kind of a suicide, when it comes to performance.
This is a good summary about the issues:
On Mon, September 13, 2010 15:37, Daevid Vincent wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Kiss D�niel
[mailto:n...@dinagon.com]
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2010
5:59 AM
Well, thanks, but I'm afraid using
UUID's (even with hex
compression) is
kind of
a suicide, when it comes to performance.
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 8:59 PM, Johnny Withers joh...@pixelated.netwrote:
This sounds like a good job for a 'NoSQL' system. Maybe?
I can't help but blink at that. How exactly is NoSQL going to fix issues
that are related to topology, not inherent SQL limitations ? Which
particular
Hi,
I'm designing a master-to-master replication architecture.
I wonder what the best way is to make sure both databases generate unique
row ID's, so there won't be ID conflicts when replicating both directions.
I read on forums about pro's and con's using UUID's, also about setting the
On 12 Sep 2010, at 19:47, Kiss Dániel wrote:
- SID adds only 2 bytes in this case to the size of the primary key item.
It can be even 1 byte if I'm sure I'll never exceed maximum 255 servers. But
anyhow, it is still way smaller than the 16 byte of a UUID field, even if
using BIGINT's.
Server offset + increment works really well, is simple, and well
documented and reliable - not sure why you would want to re-invent
something that works so well :).
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:
You may be right. I'm not arguing that offset + increment is working.
I'm just wondering if that's the optimal solution when you do not know how
many servers you will have in your array in the future. In my view, the
offset + increment thingy is good if you know in advance that you'll have a
Hello,
I have two separate databases that I need to query data from. In the
following SELECT statement, 'title' and 'db_entry_name' are in database1,
and 'projectID' is in database2. If they were in one database, this
SELECT should work. How should I tweak it to get data from both database1
-Original Message-
From: Bing Du [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 4:09 PM
To: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: possible to select from multiple databases?
Hello,
I have two separate databases that I need to query data from. In the
following SELECT statement, 'title
Bing Du wrote:
I have two separate databases that I need to query data from. In the
following SELECT statement, 'title' and 'db_entry_name' are in database1,
and 'projectID' is in database2. If they were in one database, this
SELECT should work. How should I tweak it to get data from both
Anyone know if it's possible to do replication from more than one
database?
Example:
System A: Database 1
System B: Database 2
System C: Replication of SYSA:DB1, Replication SYSB:DB2
Thanks,
Jeff
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:
No, unfortunately you cannot have multiple masters on a single replication
slave.
You can however have multiple daemons running on system (C) via
mysqld_multi.
Atle
-
Flying Crocodile Inc, Unix Systems Administrator
On Fri, 13 Jan 2006, Jeff wrote:
Anyone know if it's possible to do
Hello.
MySQL allows to have only one master for replication. But if it is
possible in your production environment, you can replicate from A to B
(database names can be rewritten with replicate-rewrite-db), and
replicate the whole stuff to C. I agree, this is not an ideal
workaround,but hope this
Hi,
I asked this question in in the mysql-cluster list, but I think this is not
really related to clustering. So I am asking it here. Please bear with the
cross posting.
I need to run a particular 'select' on multiple machines, and then reorder
them. The query is: 'select * from table
On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 01:46:23PM +0530, George Cherian wrote:
I need to run a particular 'select' on multiple machines, and then reorder
them. The query is: 'select * from table where parent_name = 'parent' order
by name limit 10. This query has to be sent to 10 servers - in series,
George Cherian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 08/22/2005 04:46:02 AM:
On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 01:46:23PM +0530, George Cherian wrote:
I need to run a particular 'select' on multiple machines, and
then reorder them. The query is: 'select * from table where
parent_name = 'parent' order by
On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 09:57:44AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You are correct in your analysis that you would get better performance if
you ran the queries asynchronously. Just remember that each query thread
will need its *own* connection. Even if you are querying two databases on
On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 08:03:08PM +0530, George Cherian wrote:
So I am surprised that no one has done this before. I am very new to
database - (about last week, is when I started getting into the intricacies),
so at present I am confused why there isn't such a solution. I had created a
Hi,
I'm not sure of what you are looking for, and what do you know.
Did you read this ?
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/mysql/en/c.html
It could give you some clues on how to do your queries from your
library. I've never seen any library able to query several servers at
the same time. Usually people
Hi,
I would like to run a query on two tables that reside in two distinct
databases:
select * from db1.table1 join db2.table2;
This lists both tables adjacent to one another rather than in a sequential
fashion as one would get if both tables came from the same database.
Is there a way to
Mahmoud Badreddine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 05/03/2005 01:43:55
PM:
Hi,
I would like to run a query on two tables that reside in two distinct
databases:
select * from db1.table1 join db2.table2;
This lists both tables adjacent to one another rather than in a
sequential
fashion as
[snip]
I would like to run a query on two tables that reside in two distinct
databases:
select * from db1.table1 join db2.table2;
This lists both tables adjacent to one another rather than in a
sequential
fashion as one would get if both tables came from the same database.
Is there a way to
That's exactly what a join does... join two or more tables as one, but
you usually define a common field to join the tables by...
If both tables have the same definition and you want to know how to
display the data of one of them after the other you need to do a:
select * from db1.table1 union
Hello.
is it possible to mysqldump specific tables from multiple databases in
a single run?
No.
database. I can not (even off hours) lock the entire database (main
one) long enough to do a full dump with locks so I see my options as:
You may write your own sql file in which you're
all,
is it possible to mysqldump specific tables from multiple databases in
a single run?
what I am trying to do is get replication slaves to a starting point
but am somewhat challenged by the nature of our architecture.
specifically, we have a large number of relatively-static (updated
only
I'm not sure if you have a problem with one large InnoDB table or one
large file. With InnoDB you can specify multiple files, limit the size
of each file and even specify the location of each file. So you could
limit your InnoDB files to say 1GB each (or lower/higher) and specify
which disk
Hi All,
I tried digging for this information in the archives but could not
find anything.
I am in to developing an app. that uses very high amount of data
(Close to 80 GB per machine). It has 3-4 logical tables. But I have to
partition them in to multiple tables because the mysql table size
If you are hitting file size limits, you probably want to look into
using the InnoDB table type. That will allow you to work around file
size limits and have a database of just about any size you need. You
won't end up having a 30GB file, but multiple smaller files which will
be transparent to
Hello.
Think about merge storage.
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/mysql/en/MERGE_storage_engine.html
Alok Gore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi All,
I tried digging for this information in the archives but could not
find anything.
I am in to developing an app. that uses very high amount
(By partitioing the
data set and having one mysql server handle one data
set). This option is only applicable if we have
multiple databases.
Thanks in advance,
-Alok.
On Tue, 2004-11-30 at 22:38, Brent Baisley wrote:
If you are hitting file size limits, you probably
want to look
David Blomstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 10/07/2004 05:37:08
PM:
I'm working on several websites that will be driven
primarily by two databases - Geography and Animals.
The Geography database will feature information about
nations, provinces and states, such as capitals,
population, etc.
I'm working on several websites that will be driven
primarily by two databases - Geography and Animals.
The Geography database will feature information about
nations, provinces and states, such as capitals,
population, etc. The Animals database features lots of
taxonomic tables (orders, families,
Hello,
I am trying to see if replication (or some open source software) can
help me
I have a multiple external databases that have the exact same table
structure. They need to be merged into a central database on a nightly
basis. The only difference between the external and central
I'm working on a rather large database - four or five
tables - that will power eight different websites.
There will also be a few additional supplemental
tables on various sites, but I'd speculate that 90% of
the data will be exactly the same on all eight sites.
With that in mind, would you
4 or 5 tables is pretty small. We've got about 200 tables here, some
containing over 100 million rows which still runs well on a simple PIII
test server.
You are definitely better off having one database serve this data. If
you want a backup, the MySQL replication stuff works very well.
On
What are the advantages and disadvantages of using multiple databases, versus
placing all tables in one uber-database?
I understand and appreciate the organizational value of multiple databases,
but what other issues are involved?
I ask this because I'm considering moving from tables across
) and scalability pov too, to split
it up into multiple databases.
Thanks,
Matt
-Original Message-
From: news [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of TO
Sent: 21 March 2004 15:14
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: multiple databases: design question
What are the advantages and disadvantages
On 8 Jan 2004, at 04:12, Paul F wrote:
Greetings, I am wandering under what circumstances it is
sensible/beneficial
to use multiple databases for a single project, and why.
The reason I ask is because I am re-developing an existing database
with
MySQL that someone else created with another
for each company then I would not need
the overhead of this field. We chose the company field over the multiple databases
because many of our clients are vertically integrated and do cross charging (an entry
from one company posts to another company). This inter-company stuff is easy
a different
database for each company then I would not need the overhead of this
field. We chose the company field over the multiple databases because many
of our clients are vertically integrated and do cross charging (an entry
from one company posts to another company). This inter-company stuff
Greetings, I am wandering under what circumstances it is sensible/beneficial
to use multiple databases for a single project, and why.
The reason I ask is because I am re-developing an existing database with
MySQL that someone else created with another engine (DBISAM) and chose to
have 5 separate
Hello all,
I am fairly new to MySQL. I have a problem, that I have not been able to
figure out. I've tried searching the net and reading the manual, but all to
no avail.
I have two databases (A and B) which have the same structure but different
field names. The code from mysqldump follows
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 10:36:08AM -0800, Jay Frumkin wrote:
Hello all,
I am fairly new to MySQL. I have a problem, that I have not been able to
figure out. I've tried searching the net and reading the manual, but all to
no avail.
I have two databases (A and B) which have the same
I have 2 databases, in each is a table called 'resources', my cleint has
asked that they always be identical to each other. Database1 will be the
master by which all else is made equal. My question:
Should I just create website #2 to talk to Database #1, I am hesitant to do
this as I have a
Hi,
I know that Mysql handles large database very well, but there is a project
that requires more than 2000 small databases(about 20 talbes with a few
rows) to be created within a Mysql server. Could somebody tell me does it
make sense?
Thanks for your consideration.
likai
:
Subject: multiple databases creation
08/05/2003 08:12
PM
Hi,
Howdy
I know that Mysql handles large database very well, but there
is a project
that requires more than 2000 small databases(about 20 talbes
with a few
rows) to be created within a Mysql server. Could somebody
tell me does it
make sense?
Err.. Sure it makes sense I guess
Scenario:
The current JDBC Connection is
jdbc:mysql//localhost:3306/=xql?user=rootpassword=myrootpass
The database `xql` contains 1 table, `settings`
Another database, `login` contains 1 table, `users`
'm' is a Matcher Object, that contains the users Name
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Mark C. Roduner, Jr. wrote:
Scenario:
The current JDBC Connection is
jdbc:mysql//localhost:3306/=xql?user=rootpassword=myrootpass
The database `xql` contains 1 table, `settings`
Another database, `login` contains 1 table, `users`
'm' is a Matcher
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 12:12:32AM -0500, Truong Thai wrote:
I have a performance question between having a single database for
all tables or splitting up tables into multiple databases.
The hosting service I use charges extra for multiple databases.
Using PHP/MySQL for website.
I
This one has been troubling me for some time now. For my project the
most ideal and quickest solution to archive data is to do an
insert...select followed by a delete on the original table. The problem
is, I'd like my archive tables to exist in another database (makes it a
lot easier on the
Hi,
I was recently assigned to finish a project started by a previous employee.
The objective is to collect data from numerous geographic locations, and
then analyze the data at the central office. The goal is to look for
combined corporate trends and present statistical results and
Hi Rebecca,
On Mon, 2002-03-04 at 05:19, Rebecca Hall wrote:
I was recently assigned to finish a project started by a previous employee.
The objective is to collect data from numerous geographic locations, and
then analyze the data at the central office. The goal is to look for
combined
I am reading the documentation about the binary log, in particular
binlog-do-db=database_name
binlog-ignore-db=database_name
(a) Can these be specified in the my.cnf file?
(b) Can multiple databases be specified, either as a list or via multiple entries in
the
configuration?
We're running
Is it possible to place the same table in multiple databases, by linking the MYD
file from one database to the next? I can see obvious problems with such a
technique, so I thought I'd ask here.
Thanks,
--
Scott F. Crosby
E-Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web : http://www.skroz.net
It's some kind
I am running Ver 8.8 Distrib 3.23.22-Beta on RedHat Linux. I have two
databases, foo and bar.
Below I show the output of mysqladmin processlist. Pid 5 is executing a
long-running select from the event table of
db foo. Pid 1 (started after pid 5) is attempting an insert in the same
event table.
Hi all, glad to be back in the list :)
I have a question related with a huge project, i could have these 2
schemes:
1) just one database with several tables
database | tables
DB_1 | user, profile, supplier, dept, etc... a lot of tables
2) several databases with few tables
72 matches
Mail list logo
