I just upgraded a server from 5.1 to 5.5. Our tables are all MyISAM. I
have a python script that inserts rows to a table, in 5.1 it worked
fine. In 5.5 it's failing with 'Lock wait timeout exceeded'. I google
this, and it seems that all the cases of people getting that were with
Inn
XTrabackup can handle both InnoDB and MyISAM in
a consistent way while minimizing lock time on
MyISAM tables ...
http://www.percona.com/doc/percona-xtrabackup/2.1/
--
Hartmut Holzgraefe, Principal Support Engineer (EMEA)
SkySQL - The MariaDB Company | http://www.skysql.com/
--
MySQL General
ase has a mixture of MyISAM- and
> InnoDB-tables. A backup of this mix does not seem to be easy. Until now it
> was dumped using "mysqldump --opt -u root --databases mausdb ...". What I
> understand until now is that --opt is not necessary because it is default. It
> incl
Hi,
i've been already reading the documentation the whole day, but still confused
and unsure what to do.
We have two databases which are important for our work. So both are stored
hourly. Now I recognized that each database has a mixture of MyISAM- and
InnoDB-tables. A backup of this mix
I got an "interesting" problem with creation of indexes on MyISAM
tables in MySQL 5.6.15 and MySQL 5.6.14 running on FreeBSD 8.4 for float
columns - I am not able to create indexes on these columns
Indexes on all other columns work just fine
The problem occur while I was loading data
-Original Message-
> From: Dolan Antenucci [mailto:antenucc...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, August 12, 2013 10:26 AM
> To: mysql@lists.mysql.com
> Subject: MyISAM index missing rows
>
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I have a MyISAM table with 25 billion rows (structure: score float&
Hi Everyone,
I have a MyISAM table with 25 billion rows (structure: ), and after I create an index on id1, certain rows can no
longer be found.
I've posted a detailed summary of my problem at dba.stackexchange.com, but
haven't had success with finding a solution thus far. Here's
ndex_date`),
> KEY `idx_visits_month` (`site_id`,`keyword`,`index_month`,`index_year`)
> ) ENGINE=MyISAM DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8
>
> Was changed into:
>
> CREATE TABLE `ga_monthly_keyword_visits` (
> `id` bigint(20) unsigned NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
> `site_i
On 2013-06-27 01:27, nixofortune wrote:
Now importing with Keys in place. It takes longer, much longer but at
least the server is working and customers do not complaint.
Schema design is awful, agree. I try to understand the process so will
redesign it soon, but any suggestions are welcome.
I'
at are the SELECTs that will benefit from them? (Sometimes discussing this
can lead to fewer/better INDEXes. Often it leads to suggesting Summary
Table(s).)
> -Original Message-
> From: Johan De Meersman [mailto:vegiv...@tuxera.be]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 11:46 AM
> To
`,`index_date`),
KEY `idx_visits_month` (`site_id`,`keyword`,`index_month`,`index_year`)
) ENGINE=MyISAM DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8
Was changed into:
CREATE TABLE `ga_monthly_keyword_visits` (
`id` bigint(20) unsigned NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
`site_id` int(11) DEFAULT NULL,
`index_date` int(11
2013/06/26 17:31 +0100, nixofortune
ALTER TABLE `new_innodb`
ADD KEY `idx1` (`col1`,`col2`),
ADD KEY `idx2` (`col1`,`col2`,`col3`);
Is it really seemly for one index to be a leading part of another?
(or maybe I am really thinking of something else)
--
MySQL General Mailing Li
You can't actually move innodb tables around until 5.6 where you have
transpotable tablespaces.
I suggest having a good hard look at pt-online-schema-change or whatsitcalled.
Jay Ess wrote:
>On 2013-06-26 18:31, nixofortune wrote:
>> What would be the best way to convert BIG MyI
bably got
'sort' because of this being big enough: "myisam_sort_buffer_size = 526M"
-Original Message-
From: nixofortune [mailto:nixofort...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, June 24, 2013 12:35 PM
To: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: space gone after MyISAM REPAIR TABLE
On 2013-06-26 18:31, nixofortune wrote:
> What would be the best way to convert BIG MyISAM table into InnoDB? We do not
> have SLAVE.
I would do it on another computer. Then copy the table to the server and then
add the data that has been added from the original table.
And/or i would expe
7; because of this being big enough: "myisam_sort_buffer_size
= 526M"
> -Original Message-
> From: nixofortune [mailto:nixofort...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2013 12:35 PM
> To: mysql@lists.mysql.com
> Subject: Re: space gone after MyISAM REPAIR TABLE
>
> O
On 24/06/13 19:57, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 24.06.2013 18:47, schrieb Johan De Meersman:
- Original Message -
From: "nixofortune"
Hi guys,
any suggestions? I just repaired 90G MyISAM table with REPAIR TABLE
command. the space on the hard drive gone down from 165 Gig to
Oops, totally missed that, thanks.
Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
>Am 24.06.2013 18:47, schrieb Johan De Meersman:
>> - Original Message -
>>> From: "nixofortune"
>>>
>>> Hi guys,
>>> any suggestions? I just repaired 90G MyISAM tab
Am 24.06.2013 18:47, schrieb Johan De Meersman:
> - Original Message -
>> From: "nixofortune"
>>
>> Hi guys,
>> any suggestions? I just repaired 90G MyISAM table with REPAIR TABLE
>> command. the space on the hard drive gone down from 165
- Original Message -
> From: "nixofortune"
>
> Hi guys,
> any suggestions? I just repaired 90G MyISAM table with REPAIR TABLE
> command. the space on the hard drive gone down from 165 Gig to 70
> Gig. I understand that during repair process MySQL creates tem
Hi guys,
any suggestions? I just repaired 90G MyISAM table with REPAIR TABLE
command. the space on the hard drive gone down from 165 Gig to 70 Gig. I
understand that during repair process MySQL creates temp file and remove
it after the job done. Or removal process executes on the server
ally it's zero. Is that a problem?
- Grant
>> I have 4 out of 6 mysql graphs working in munin. "MySQL isam/myisam
>> table-space usage" is a broken image and "MySQL InnoDB free
>> tablespace" says:
>>
>> "This service is in CRITICAL sta
in not able to
represent that number.
For "MySQL isam/myisam table-space usage" broken image I have no idee on
how that check is built,
moreover MyISAM does not have a real tablespace.
If it makes you feel better in
http://demo.munin.jp/munin2/mysql-day.html that is broken too ;)
> I have 4 out of 6 mysql graphs working in munin. "MySQL isam/myisam
> table-space usage" is a broken image and "MySQL InnoDB free
> tablespace" says:
>
> "This service is in CRITICAL state because one of the values reported
> is outside the allowed ra
I have 4 out of 6 mysql graphs working in munin. "MySQL isam/myisam
table-space usage" is a broken image and "MySQL InnoDB free
tablespace" says:
"This service is in CRITICAL state because one of the values reported
is outside the allowed range.
Field Internal na
copy/reorg. Inserting rows (of data or
index) in sorted order will produce a more compact BTree. Random insertion
will (in theory) lead to about 40% overhead.
Tricking MyISAM into "Rebuild by sorting" instead of "rebuild by keybuffer"
should take the more compact approac
_ is automatically recovered. If so, you
> might see the .MYD shrink even when OPTIMIZE is not run.
Yes, that's what I do, of course; but the free space should really be
reallocated to updates - escpecially because of the longtext, which means it's
allowed to fragment. Are t
InnoDB, the LONGTEXT will usually be stored separately, thereby making a
full table scan relatively efficient.
> -Original Message-
> From: Johan De Meersman [mailto:vegiv...@tuxera.be]
> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2013 4:21 AM
> To: mysql.
> Subject: MyISAM table size vs a
to take half a minute, on a table that is accessed so often that it's
relevant blocks are bound to be in the filesystem cache.
The table's structure is fairly simple, too:
CREATE TABLE `variable` (
`name` varchar(128) NOT NULL DEFAULT '',
`value` longtext NOT NULL,
P
Hello,
Well, you have just invented what is known as index organized tables. The
MyISAM engine does not implement those.
If it did, it would have to deal with quite a few circumstances unique to IOTs.
One such circumstance is degradation
of efficiency with the increase of record length
MyISAM can't do this but innodb can. If you change to an innodb table
and define your index as the primary key then row data is clustered
with the primary key. This means there is no additional storage
overhead for the primary key because it is just the row data. This
will break down if you d
Am 24.11.2012 22:02, schrieb Hank:
> Hello everyone,
>
> I know this is a longshot, but is there any way to eliminate the MYD
> file for a table that has a full covering index? The index is larger
> than the datafile, since it contains all the records in the datafile,
> plus a second reverse in
ing the secondary indexes after
>> > the
>> > data import or such alters are complete.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Akshay Suryavanshi
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 1:56 AM, Rick James
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> &
I try to figure out something observing the stats with SHOW STATUS. There are
some reads, writes, etc that tell something about what is going on.
Looking just at the file sizes is likely going to not tell much about the
progress.
If there is a better way to monitor this progress, I would li
Am 27.09.2012 23:15, schrieb Larry Martell:
>> Indexes are slowing this down. your calculation of 79 hours should be
>> correct, only if there are no unique indexes, otherwise this will slow down
>> more as the data increases.
>
> It is what it is - there's no free lunch - dropping the indexes, do
you carry this operation by adding the secondary indexes after
>> > the
>> > data import or such alters are complete.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Akshay Suryavanshi
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 1:56 AM, Rick James
>&
ndo logs.
> >>
> >> > -Original Message-
> >> > From: Larry Martell [mailto:larry.mart...@gmail.com]
> >> > Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2012 1:20 PM
> >> > To: Rick James
> >> > Cc: mysql mailing list
> >> >
gt;> > To: Rick James
>> > Cc: mysql mailing list
>> > Subject: checking progress of alter table on an InnoDB table (Was: Re:
>> > checking progress of alter table on a MyISAM table)
>> >
>> > So we changed the table from MyISAM to InnoDB. I read
nal Message-
> > From: Larry Martell [mailto:larry.mart...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2012 1:20 PM
> > To: Rick James
> > Cc: mysql mailing list
> > Subject: checking progress of alter table on an InnoDB table (Was: Re:
> > checking progress of a
gt; -Original Message-
>> From: Larry Martell [mailto:larry.mart...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2012 1:20 PM
>> To: Rick James
>> Cc: mysql mailing list
>> Subject: checking progress of alter table on an InnoDB table (Was: Re:
>> checking progress of
: checking progress of alter table on an InnoDB table (Was: Re:
> checking progress of alter table on a MyISAM table)
>
> So we changed the table from MyISAM to InnoDB. I read that the 'undo
> log entries' shown in 'show engine innodb status' would correspond to
&g
So we changed the table from MyISAM to InnoDB. I read that the 'undo
log entries' shown in 'show engine innodb status' would correspond to
the number of rows that have been operated on throughout the process
of the ALTER. The table we're altering has 115,096,205 rows, and
Long term solution:
Switch to XtraDB (InnoDB), and use Percona's online alter.
If you do switch engines, take note of issues:
http://kb.askmonty.org/en/converting-tables-from-myisam-to-innodb/
> -Original Message-
> From: Reindl Harald [mailto:h.rei...@thelounge.net]
> Sent
2012/09/26 09:31 -0700, Rick James
You could look at the .TYD and .TYI file sizes and compare to the .MYD and
.MYI, but that can be deceptive. If the table is really big, and has lots of
indexes, the generation of the indexes might go slower and slower -- hence any
math on the sizes w
.
> -Original Message-
> From: Larry Martell [mailto:larry.mart...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 8:52 AM
> To: mysql mailing list
> Subject: checking progress of alter table on a MyISAM table
>
> Is there any way to check on the progress of a long running alte
Is there any way to check on the progress of a long running alter
table on a MyISAM table? I know it can be done with an InnoDB table,
but I haven't found a way to do it on with a MyISAM table.
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:
Am 21.09.2012 18:18, schrieb Rick James:
> (Apologies to the rare bottom-poster.)
bullshit
on mostly egvery mailing-list there are guidlines that you NOT
should top-post, try it out on the postfix-list as example
and wait what Wietse wille xplain you about both
* your top-posting
* and your st
(Apologies to the rare bottom-poster.)
This contains lots of tips on converting from MyISAM to InnoDB:
http://mysql.rjweb.org/doc.php/myisam2innodb
Generally, the conversion should go smoothly.
> -Original Message-
> From: Reindl Harald [mailto:h.rei...@thelounge.net]
> Sen
y production database tables which are
> using
> > myISAM and now bcoz of some changes we have to move to Innodb.
> >
> > Can anyone suggest how the plan should be and risks involve?
>
> no because this depends hardly on your data and what the application
&
Hi Reindl,
I'm sorry if I ask wrong question here?
I'm new to this and people before me did the terrible mistake of using
myISAM even though they decided to move to Innodb many times. Data grows
like hell and now requirements came in where we have to use transactions.
At this stage
On 21/09/2012 9:26 AM, Girish Talluru wrote:
Hi Guys,
I have requirement to change my production database tables which are using
myISAM and now bcoz of some changes we have to move to Innodb.
Can anyone suggest how the plan should be and risks involve?
Thanks,
Girish Talluru
Whatafford
Am 21.09.2012 15:26, schrieb Girish Talluru:
> I have requirement to change my production database tables which are using
> myISAM and now bcoz of some changes we have to move to Innodb.
>
> Can anyone suggest how the plan should be and risks involve?
no because this depends ha
Hi Guys,
I have requirement to change my production database tables which are using
myISAM and now bcoz of some changes we have to move to Innodb.
Can anyone suggest how the plan should be and risks involve?
Thanks,
Girish Talluru
Am 04.06.2012 14:35, schrieb Joey L:
> i am running mysqlrepair on 80G myisam table.
> It is taking forever to repair - i am getting a lot of "Waiting for
> table" messeges when i execute "show full processlist"
>
> 613 | p_040912 | localhost | p_040912
i am running mysqlrepair on 80G myisam table.
It is taking forever to repair - i am getting a lot of "Waiting for
table" messeges when i execute "show full processlist"
613 | p_040912 | localhost | p_040912| Query | 24 | Waiting
for table | SELECT `oldurl`, `newu
- Original Message -
> From: "Charles Brown"
>
> Interestingly, over the years, I've been reading your postings and
> threads - without a doubt you're a major contributor. You've been
> very resourceful and helpful to your peers. We may never know what
> caused you to violently snap this
flies in the face of
> all rational behavior.
>
> Best regards,
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Reindl Harald [mailto:h.rei...@thelounge.net]
> Sent: Friday, May 04, 2012 3:23 AM
> To: mysql@lists.mysql.com
> Subject: Re: Myisam won't support replication
ertures. The thought that an intelligent individual like you
would bring himself this low flies in the face of all rational behavior.
Best regards,
-Original Message-
From: Reindl Harald [mailto:h.rei...@thelounge.net]
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2012 3:23 AM
To: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subje
Am 04.05.2012 06:45, schrieb Brown:
> Does anyone have idea or experienced in MySQL Cluster configured for
> bi-directional replication. Please advise me if you have to use NDBcluster
> engine in order to get replication between the data nodes. I'm using MYISAM
> on several
Does anyone have idea or experienced in MySQL Cluster configured for
bi-directional replication. Please advise me if you have to use NDBcluster
engine in order to get replication between the data nodes. I'm using MYISAM on
several tables that will not repl
Does anyone have idea or experienced in MySQL Cluster configured for
bi-directional replication. Please advise me if you have to use NDBcluster
engine in order to get replication between the data nodes. I'm using MYISAM on
several tables that will not repl
If I am not mistaken, NDB Cluster replication is separate from InnoDB/MyISAM.
Perhaps you set one up, but not the other?
> -Original Message-
> From: Andrew Moore [mailto:eroomy...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2012 2:35 PM
> To: Brown, Charles
> Cc: MySQL; D
Charles,
How do you know your replication isn't working?
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 9:50 PM, Brown, Charles wrote:
> I noticed that my replication stopped working after migrating to MySQL
> cluster. My current engine is myisam. Does anyone have an idea why repl
> won't work. D
I noticed that my replication stopped working after migrating to MySQL cluster.
My current engine is myisam. Does anyone have an idea why repl won't work. Do I
have to use the ndbengine?
This message is intended only for the use of the Addr
t outlines many of them:
http://mysql.rjweb.org/doc.php/myisam2innodb
In the long run there are advantages in using InnoDB instead of MyISAM. I
suggest you put the change on your roadmap.
The new default came with MySQL 5.5 (IIRC); not with Enterprise specifically.
> -Original Messag
, tables are now defaulting to innodb (how can he tell)
>
> as already said:
>
> the builtin default has changed an you have to configure MyISAM
> as default yourself with "default-storage-engine = myisam"
>
> and yes, InnoDB can be a big problem if your application
Charles,
I think going back to MyISAM as default is a good idea.
All you have to do is:
Export all databases
.Shutdown the cluster MySQL
.Add one parameter to your old my.cnf , default-storage-engine=myisam
.add cluster specific parameters to your my.cnf , they should be a couple
.Put back your
Am 29.04.2012 14:50, schrieb Brown:
> is a complain I received from one of my developer that after following our
> MySQL
> Cluster migration, tables are now defaulting to innodb (how can he tell)
as already said:
the builtin default has changed an you have to configure MyISAM
a
Very little was said about Myisam. Most of the discussions were
centered on innordb and NDB. Thus my objective is clearly laid out. I may have
to convert all tables back to MyISAM or invest time in tuning. Your thoughts ?
Lastly, can I bring over old performance parameters found in my.cnf. These
t
> statement.
>
> ** **
>
> mysql>
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Claudio Nanni [mailto:claudio.na...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Saturday, April 28, 2012 2:48 PM
> *To:* Brown, Charles
> *Cc:* mysql@lists.mysql.com
&g
torage engine and whether it be MyISAM, InnoDB, NDB and it's a design
decision, but only NDB tables will benefit from the clustering capabilities.
I hope I got your question right and that this shed a bit more light for
you.
Cheers
Claudio
2012/4/28 Brown, Charles
> The question
The question is, is it advisable to change the default engine of a cluster
setting to Myisam? Does anyone have an opinion or experience on this issue? Do
I have choice when it comes to clustering on which type engine supports
clustering.
Thanks
-Original Message-
From: Reindl
Am 28.04.2012 09:00, schrieb Brown:
> We recently switched from MySQL community to Mysql clustered using Oracle
> supported MySQl. The problem is, during our testing phase, we observed the
> default engine is now innoDB instead of MyISAM. Any thoughts on that? We're
>
Hello all,
We recently switched from MySQL community to Mysql clustered using Oracle
supported MySQl. The problem is, during our testing phase, we observed the
default engine is now innoDB instead of MyISAM. Any thoughts on that? We're not
getting the performance that we expected
first,i configure it with "WITH_INNOBASE_STORAGE_ENGINE:BOOL=OFF"
>> flag,after that,i start mysqld failed,it returns "[ERROR]
>> Unknown/unsupported storage engine: InnoDB" error message.
>>
>> and i rebuild it with INNODB engine enabled,it works.but whe
nsupported storage engine: InnoDB" error message.
>
> and i rebuild it with INNODB engine enabled,it works.but when i add
> "|ignore-builtin-innodb|" option to my.cnf file,and also make myisam as
> the default engine with "default-storage-engine=MyISAM" in my.cnf
- Original Message -
> From: "Yu Watanabe"
>
> So, which memory corresponds to 'pages' for the MyISAM then?
> It would be helpful if you can help me with this.
None, as Reindl said. This is not a memory issue, it's a function of I/O
optimization. R
you should try to understand what pages are
your data + keys + fragmentation overhead if
deleted records are the size of the files
Am 24.11.2011 10:46, schrieb Yu Watanabe:
> Hi Reindl.
>
> Thanks for the reply.
>
> So, which memory corresponds to 'pages' for the M
Hi Reindl.
Thanks for the reply.
So, which memory corresponds to 'pages' for the MyISAM then?
It would be helpful if you can help me with this.
Thanks,
Yu
Reindl Harald さんは書きました:
>key buffer is memory and has nothing to do with file sizes
>filesize increeases by data and key
key buffer is memory and has nothing to do with file sizes
filesize increeases by data and keys
key buffer is as the name says a memory-buffer for kyes
Am 24.11.2011 10:25, schrieb Yu Watanabe:
> Hello Johan.
>
> Thank you for the reply.
> I see. So it will depend on the key buffer size.
>
> Tha
Hello Johan.
Thank you for the reply.
I see. So it will depend on the key buffer size.
Thanks,
Yu
Johan De Meersman さんは書きました:
>- Original Message -
>> From: "Yu Watanabe"
>>
>> It seems that MYD is the data file but this file size seems to be not
>> increasing after the insert sql.
>
>
At 02:45 AM 11/23/2011, you wrote:
Also,
since MySQL 5.1 MyISAM has an algorythm to detect if you are going to
delete a row without ever reading it,
so when you insert it, it will use the blackhole storage engine instead.
:O (NB: it is a joke)
Claudio
Claudio,
I have been using the
Also,
since MySQL 5.1 MyISAM has an algorythm to detect if you are going to
delete a row without ever reading it,
so when you insert it, it will use the blackhole storage engine instead.
:O (NB: it is a joke)
Claudio
2011/11/23 Johan De Meersman
> - Original Message -
> >
- Original Message -
> From: "Yu Watanabe"
>
> It seems that MYD is the data file but this file size seems to be not
> increasing after the insert sql.
That's right, it's an L-space based engine; all the data that has, is and will
ever be created is already in there, so storage never in
Hi !
I would like to ask question regarding to the MyISAM engine.
Is there any physical file that you have to be aware of its size
for disk sizing, like the ibdata1 in innodb storage engine?
It seems that MYD is the data file but this file size seems to be not
increasing after the insert sql
>-Original Message-
>From: Lucio Chiappetti [mailto:lu...@lambrate.inaf.it]
>Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 3:18 AM
>To: Jerry Schwartz
>Cc: Mysql List
>Subject: RE: How MyISAM handle auto_increment
>
>On Wed, 5 Oct 2011, Jerry Schwartz wrote:
>
>> Can&#x
Good to see the issue has been solved. What I noticed in the mysqltuner output,
is that you may want to enlarge your table_cache and open files limit before
you run into problems there.
- Original Message -
> From: "Johnny Withers"
>
> I haven't used MYISAM in
cesslist and show full
> processlist.
>
> I saw the full queries and the main thing was that it was doing a
> query about 20 miles long.
>
> thanks again
> mjh
>
> On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 7:48 PM, Jan Steinman wrote:
>>> From: Joey L
>>>
>
about 20 miles long.
thanks again
mjh
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 7:48 PM, Jan Steinman wrote:
>> From: Joey L
>>
>> i did google search - myisam is faster...i am not really doing any
>> transaction stuff.
>
> That's true for read-only. But if you have a mix o
> From: Joey L
>
> i did google search - myisam is faster...i am not really doing any
> transaction stuff.
That's true for read-only. But if you have a mix of reads and writes, MYISAM
locks tables during writes, which could be blocking reads.
In a museum in
u have the ability to modify the table structure and the
software, a column could be added to the table that is the result of
SOUNDEX(oldurl) and then an index added to that column. The where clause
could then use soundex_column=whatever instead and utilize the index.
I haven't used MYISAM in a
p_092211 | Query |7 | Locked
| INSERT INTO `w6h8a_sh404sef_urls` (`cpt`, `rank`, `oldurl`,
`newurl`, `dateadd`) VALUES (1, 0, '2O1/ |
+--+--+---+--+-+--+--+----
wrote:
> Okay, lets hold on for a minute here and go back. We're side tracking too
> much.
>
> Lets state the facts here:
>
> 1) MyISAM stores the row count internally, a 'select count(*) from table'
> DOES NOT DO A FULL TABLE SCAN
> 2) hell, a software
I am curious.. Are you the only client on this database or or there other
connections doing work in the background? A busy insert/update heavy
application could cause these effects.
- michael dykman
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 12:35 PM, Joey L wrote:
> i did google search - myisam is faster.
i did google search - myisam is faster...i am not really doing any
transaction stuff.
thanks
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 12:16 PM, Andrew Moore wrote:
> Sorry, hit send by accident there! *face palm*
> Just had a quick scan of the report. You've got 2 1GB disks in software raid
> - RAI
larger then the keybuffer size. I would suspect that you're disk bound with
limited IO performance through 2 disks and effectively 1 if in a mirrored
configuration. The stats show that you're configured for MyISAM and that
you're tables are taking reads and writes (read heavy tho
with '--help' for additional options and output filtering
> Please enter your MySQL administrative login: root
> Please enter your MySQL administrative password:
>
> General Statistics
> --
> [
-- Storage Engine Statistics ---
[--] Status: +Archive -BDB -Federated +InnoDB -ISAM -NDBCluster
[--] Data in MyISAM tables: 7G (Tables: 2408)
[--] Data in InnoDB tables: 1M (Tables: 37)
[!!] Total fragmented tables: 49
Security Recommendations ---
> thanks for the response - but do not believe queries are the issue
> because - Like I said - i have other websites doing the same exact
> queries as I am doing on the site with the 9gig table.
Contrary to popular believe, size DOES matter... And having a table large
enough so it doesn't fit in
I keep finding it extremely peculiar that a count(*) on a MyISAM table would
take that long. InnoDB needs to effectively *count* the records, but MyISAM
keeps accurate statistics and can just read it from the metadata.
This suggests to me that not all your metadata (ie., table descriptors et al
1 - 100 of 1222 matches
Mail list logo
