PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 7:09 PM
Subject: Re: InnoDB: Assertion failure in file ha_innodb.cc line 2180...
Jeremy, Jocelyn,
can you try the following this patch?
The flag which bans MySQL using a descending cursor to calculate
column LIKE 'jhghj%' ORDER BY column DESC
flag.
- Original Message -
From: Jocelyn Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 9:04 PM
Subject: Re: InnoDB: Assertion failure in file ha_innodb.cc line 2180...
Hi Heikki,
The query doesn't
Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
(http://www.ezmlm.org)
From: gbu [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm experiencing very strange innodb behavior.
What version of mysqld?
-
Before posting, please check:
I'm experiencing very strange innodb behavior.
What version of mysqld?
About test system. FreeBSD 4.2, MySQL 3.23.49, my.cnf innodb settings:
===
# Uncomment the following if you are using Innobase tables
innodb_data_file_path = ibdata1:2M
innodb_data_home_dir =
Hi all:
I'm seeing a strange problem updating a field if
that field is referenced as a FK in another table.
Consider:
CREATE TABLE A (
id INTEGER NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
name VARCHAR(20),
PRIMARY KEY (id)
);
CREATE TABLE B (
id INTEGER
At 12:10 -0700 9/23/02, j.random.programmer wrote:
Hi all:
I'm seeing a strange problem updating a field if
that field is referenced as a FK in another table.
Consider:
CREATE TABLE A (
id INTEGER NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
name VARCHAR(20),
PRIMARY KEY
Matthew,
- Original Message -
From: Matthew Fallshaw [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.mysql
Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 5:40 AM
Subject: Re: InnoDB Win2k Service doesn't start
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthew Fallshaw) wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Now
I have been working with Mysql-Myisam, but when I converted to Inoodb
I
noticed that my queries were much slower.
Why?
Inno DB handles transactions. So if they are on
it generally would be slower vs. if they are off
since it has to keep both copies of data (before
and after change)
what can
Duane,
yes, you can change the last data file as auto-extending.
Shut down mysqld, edit the my.cnf file, and start mysqld again.
Another solution is just to add another file ibdata2:
innodb_data_file_path = ibdata1:1000M;ibdata2:10M:autoextend
Best regards,
Heikki
Innobase Oy
Copied
actually know what a steaming pile of crap WinME is.
Matt
- Original Message -
From: Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, September 07, 2002 2:03 PM
Subject: Re: Innodb error on windows ME platform
Neil,
- Original Message -
From: Neil Malkani
Neil,
- Original Message -
From: Neil Malkani [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.mysql
Sent: Saturday, September 07, 2002 7:46 PM
Subject: Innodb error on windows ME platform
Hi,
I have just installed and setup MySQL unfortunately I do not seem to be
able
to resolve
Hi!
- Original Message -
From: PR [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.mysql
Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 5:31 PM
Subject: innodb questions about message board apps
Hi all, I've been reading a bit on the innodb table type for mysql here
and
on the site and some other
Heikki,
Yep. That's why I use seperate connections for holding the lock and
to do the subsequent locking attempts. Besides, if that were the
problem, I would see the lock disappear at the very first failed
locking attempt, but that's not the case.
I thought it might be a connection timeout,
Wouter,
the Lock Monitor output tells that trx 370099 has been committed or rolled
back by the user. That is why the locks have disappeared.
Have you taken into account the following:
8.5 When does MySQL implicitly commit or rollback a transaction?
a.. MySQL has the autocommit mode switched
]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.mysql
Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 7:20 PM
Subject: Re: InnoDB locks disappear
Wouter,
the Lock Monitor output tells that trx 370099 has been committed or rolled
back by the user. That is why the locks have disappeared.
Have you taken into account
Wouter,
- Original Message -
From: Wouter Zelle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.mysql
Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 10:59 AM
Subject: Re: InnoDB locks disappear
Heikki,
Unfortunately it is not that easy. I've set the
innodb_lock_wait_timeout to 1 because I want
This implies that I have to preguess how large each data file will be.
Correct. However, all InnoDB tables will share this space automatically.
(Corrolary: A single table will automatically span several InnoDB data
files if need be.)
Now, I understand with MyISAM tables that they just grow
Heikki,
Unfortunately it is not that easy. I've set the
innodb_lock_wait_timeout to 1 because I want locks to fail quickly,
so my program can move on to the next request. In pseudocode:
Fetch a bunch of requests with status=unprocessed
Try to obtain a lock through a select * from x for update
David,
Wednesday, September 04, 2002, 9:34:55 AM, you wrote:
From the online manual I see:
DL --
DL innodb_data_file_path
DL Paths to individual data files and their sizes. The full directory path
DL to each data file is acquired by concatenating innodb_data_home_dir to
DL the paths specified
Hi Alexander,
I believe that the the 'count()' function works differently under
INNODB type tables. With MyISAM count(*) is stored in a 'table
status' area, but INNODB must scan the tables and count the rows
(very slow). All other types of queries should perform much better
for you, but
.
Regards
Alexander Varshavchick, Metrocom Joint Stock Company
Phone: (812)118-3322, 118-3115(fax)
On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Ken Menzel wrote:
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2002 10:34:06 -0400
From: Ken Menzel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Varshavchick Alexander [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re
Wouter,
- Original Message -
From: Wouter Zelle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.mysql
Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 7:43 PM
Subject: InnoDB locks disappear
My program uses locks to allow for multi-threading (processing
requests that are stored in the database using
Yuri,
looks like InnoDB was trying to allocate 4 GB + 232 bytes.
A major bug in the 64-bit version was fixed in 3.23.52:
July 20, 2002: On 64-bit computers updating rows whichcontained the SQL NULL
in some column could cause theundo log andthe ordinary log to become
corrupt. Fixed in 3.23.52.
Joe,
- Original Message -
From: Joe Shear [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.mysql
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 12:15 AM
Subject: Innodb deadlock printouts in .52
Hi,
I'm running mysql 3.23.52 w/ innodb tables, and I started getting some
deadlocks since upgrading
You might want to lookup MySQL and RAID. MySQL does support a database
RAID setup. This confused me early on because I kept thinking of disk
based RAID, but this is database based RAID. I haven't used it yet, so
I can't help you any more that that. Hope it helps a little.
On Thursday,
On Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 02:54:02PM -0400, Brent Baisley wrote:
You might want to lookup MySQL and RAID. MySQL does support a
database RAID setup.
If you change support to provide, I'd agree. We use MySQL on RAID
systems all the time, so it certainly supports it.
Jeremy
--
Jeremy D. Zawodny
to create a database in a specified tablespace.
-Original Message-
From: Brent Baisley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, August 19, 2002 2:54 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: InnoDB and disk geometry
You might want to lookup MySQL and RAID. MySQL does
heikki,
Anyone i running MySQL with InnoDB
on FreeBSD-Alpha?
I get the mysqld compiling/running
ok. DB dump is restored ok locally.
Locally everything wirks. But it
crashes on the incoming network connection.
unaligned access: va=0x11fff784
Yuri,
- Original Message -
From: Yuri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.mysql
Sent: Saturday, August 17, 2002 1:41 AM
Subject: InnoDB on FreeBSD-Alpha problem
Anyone i running MySQL with InnoDB
on FreeBSD-Alpha?
I get the mysqld compiling/running
ok. DB dump is
Heikki,
I get the mysqld compiling/running
ok. DB dump is restored ok locally.
Locally everything wirks. But it
what do you mean with this? If you issue SQL statements from the same
computer, they work ok?
Exactly. If I connect via local UNIX socket all
happily works.
If I just connect
Yuri,
- Original Message -
From: Yuri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, August 17, 2002 5:13 PM
Subject: Re: InnoDB on FreeBSD-Alpha problem
Heikki,
I get the mysqld compiling/running
ok. DB dump is restored ok locally
Heikki,
if you can compile with the gcc -g option and run mysqld inside gdb,
then
you probably see in what function and line it crashes.
That's what I am going to do.
If you just take a connection to mysqld, it does not execute InnoDB code
at
all.
Well I was connecting to it before ok, but
On Fri, 9 Aug 2002, Thomas Seifert wrote:
On Thu, 8 Aug 2002 03:02:40 -0700
Jeremy Zawodny [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
btw:
I did a quick benchmark with mysql4 and its query caching running with
innodb.
Quite impressive, the app run with double the number of pages per second as
On Thu, 8 Aug 2002 03:02:40 -0700
Jeremy Zawodny [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
btw:
I did a quick benchmark with mysql4 and its query caching running with
innodb.
Quite impressive, the app run with double the number of pages per second as
before.
Excellent. MySQL 4.0.{2,3} is working
On Fri, Aug 09, 2002 at 09:21:13PM +0200, Thomas Seifert wrote:
On Thu, 8 Aug 2002 03:02:40 -0700
Jeremy Zawodny [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Excellent. MySQL 4.0.{2,3} is working well for us too.
Is there 4.0.3 already somewhere to download?
Not yet. I believe there will be a 4.0.3 beta
On Fri, Aug 09, 2002 at 02:38:03PM -0700, Joe Shear wrote:
[snip]
COMMIT
we are using the highest level of transactional security -- the term for
it eludes me at the moment.
You mean the isolation level? Are you running at SERIALIZABLE rather
than READ-COMMITTED? IF so, why? You will
yes, we are running at serializable, which also explains the locking
problems, especially since we just upgraded from .49.
thanks
joe
On Fri, 2002-08-09 at 15:27, Jeremy Zawodny wrote:
On Fri, Aug 09, 2002 at 02:38:03PM -0700, Joe Shear wrote:
[snip]
COMMIT
we are using the highest
- Original Message -
From: Jeremy Zawodny [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Joe Shear [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, August 09, 2002 5:27 PM
Subject: Re: InnoDB Locking Problems
On Fri, Aug 09, 2002 at 02:38:03PM -0700, Joe Shear wrote:
[snip]
COMMIT
we are using
Hi Heikki,
Thank you for responding.
(http://www.innodb.com/ibman.html#InnoDB_tuning), but am getting bit
when the log files are full and the buffer pool is checkpointed.
InnoDB does 'fuzzy checkpoints'. That means modified database pages in the
buffer pool are flushed to disk in
Pete,
- Original Message -
From: Jeremy Zawodny [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.mysql
Sent: Friday, August 02, 2002 2:40 AM
Subject: Re: InnoDB: Looong pause when log file is full?
On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 04:37:05PM -0500, Pete Harlan wrote:
Hi,
I've read
speters,
Friday, August 02, 2002, 3:08:44 AM, you wrote:
s I was wondering about the Enum and Set column types in InnoDB tables.
s I was able to create an InnoDB table with an enum column, but i
s get errors when trying to insert values into that column.
s I'm thinking that InnoDB doesnt
On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 04:37:05PM -0500, Pete Harlan wrote:
Hi,
I've read the performance tuning tips for InnoDB
(http://www.innodb.com/ibman.html#InnoDB_tuning), but am getting bit
when the log files are full and the buffer pool is checkpointed.
By 'geting bit', I mean for several
Thanks for your feedback (and your general untiring devotion to the
cause...)
On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 04:30:10PM -0700, Jeremy Zawodny wrote:
about what we can do to alleviate this? Instead of having three 150mb
log files, would we be better off with 30 15mb log files?
It shouldn't
for MySQL
See http://www.innodb.com, download MySQL-Max from http://www.mysql.com
- Original Message -
From: Dicky Wahyu Purnomo [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.mysql
Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 2:14 AM
Subject: Re: InnoDB, replication and create table w/3.23.51?
I can
I can reproduce the problem with (on the master):
create table foo (a int);
rename table foo to foobar;
Then the slave dies. Is this a known problem? I couldn't find
anything at google or the list archives, but I've been off the list
for a while. Is there a workaround?
Joe,
are you also using MySQL table level locks? I mean
LOCK TABLES ... READ, ... WRITE
The deadlock detection algorithm does not know of them and we must resort to
a timeout.
Below we see that the second trx has shared row level locks though it is
executing an UPDATE. An UPDATE sets
Christian,
the patch below may fix the problem if it is in the initialization of the
raw device to zero.
InnoDB does all normal i/o to/from the data files to memory addresses
aligned by UNIV_PAGE_SIZE. This is because earlier versions used the Windows
native AIO and that requires aligned memory
On Fri, Jul 19, 2002 at 08:16:06AM +0200, Daniel Kiss wrote:
Hi,
How can I ask the MySQL server how much free space is in InnoDB tablespaces?
SHOW TABLE STATUS will tell you
--
Jeremy D. Zawodny | Perl, Web, MySQL, Linux Magazine, Yahoo!
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://jeremy.zawodny.com/
[ MySQL ]
Here's some additional data now that I've rebuilt using --enable-debug or
whatever the configure option is.
Here's what GDB is claiming is happening after it ran for about 2 minutes
(after initial startup when NO files needed to be created)
(gdb) where
#0 thr_local_get (id=60) at
and latest news on InnoDB
- Original Message -
From: Rick Flower [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: MySQL Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2002 12:58 AM
Subject: Re: Innodb startup hangs on AIX 4.3.3 when built with IBM's
VisualAge C/C++ compiler
Massimo,
Tuesday, July 16, 2002, 1:02:15 PM, you wrote:
MP I am a new user of mysql
MP I installed 3.23.51 on my nt
MP this is my my.ini files.
MP [mysqld]
MP innodb_data_home_dir =
MP innodb_data_file_path = ibdata1:30M:autoextend
MP default-table-type=innodb
MP [WinMySQLAdmin]
MP
]; Cal Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 15, 2002 7:40 AM
Subject: RE: Innodb
Hi Cal,
Thanks for the tip. But any reasons as to why 3.23.51-max is preferred to
3.23.49-max-nt?
cheers,
Ki Mien
-Original Message-
From: Cal Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, July 13, 2002 11:34
]
Subject:Re: Innodb
Ki,
mysqld-max-nt.exe is the same as mysqld-max.exe, except that you can also
use named pipes as the client communication channel in mysqld-max-nt.exe.
There should be no difference in stability.
There are some small bug fixes in 3.23.51 which were not yet in .49.
Best
12:48 PM
Subject: RE: Innodb
Hi Heikki,
Thanks for the help.
What do you mean by small bugs? Do you mind naming the few that caused the
most problems?
cheers,
Ki Mien
-Original Message-
From: Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 15, 2002 4:46 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL
Hi,
Thanks for all the help. Appreciate it.
cheers,
Ki Mien
-Original Message-
From: Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 15, 2002 8:24 PM
To: Ki Mien [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:Re: Innodb
Ki,
please consult
], Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:RE: Innodb
3.23.51-max if you are using Windows.
=C=
*
* Cal Evans
* The Virtual CIO
* http://www.calevans.com
*
-Original Message-
From: Ki Mien [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, July 13, 2002 10:17 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Heikki
3.23.51-max if you are using Windows.
=C=
*
* Cal Evans
* The Virtual CIO
* http://www.calevans.com
*
-Original Message-
From: Ki Mien [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, July 13, 2002 10:17 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Heikki Tuuri
Subject: Innodb
Hi all,
Can anyone out there
It all depends if you need to use transactions. If you are entering items
from a cart into a database you may want to use transactions to make sure
ALL items get written correctly before you actually commit the changes to
the database. With InnoDB tables you can use transactions so if one or all
At 06:28 AM 7/5/2002, you wrote:
Hello! :)
I'm wondering which table type is better and why for
web project with about 100 000 customers. May be
InnoDB gives better query performance? I'm using now
MyIsam, but is this better idea to move to InnoDB?
Thank you! :)
In addition to Steve's
Hi!
In upcoming 3.23.52 you can put
SET NO_FOREIGN_KEY_CHECKS=1;
at the start of your dump file. Then you can import your tables in any
order. This syntax is not yet in 4.0.2.
4.0.2 will be released probably next week, 3.23.52 a few days later.
Best regards,
Heikki Tuuri
Innobase Oy
---
Hytham,
- Original Message -
From: Hytham Shehab [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.mysql
Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2002 6:21 AM
Subject: Re: innodb is disabled, how can i make it yes?
hi Heikki,
i do what u said:
yourpathtomysqlbindir mysqld-max-nt --console
cannot
To: Paul DuBois
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: innodb is disabled, how can i make it yes?
hi Paul:
Make sure it's not being started with --skip-innodb.
i am sure that the --skip-innodb is not in any of my configuration files.
sql
--
Hytham Shehab
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus
Salutations.
1:
I personally use InnoDB. I think Bdb tables were the first with
transactions but I don't see a lot of people talking about using them these
days. Also, InnoDB is being activly developed and between sleeping, eating
and coding, Heikki answers questions here! :)
2:
Signed
at last,
i got an error 5 'Access Denied', then after some blah,blah, etc, etc,
it got started with InnoDB.
not InnoDB is yes.
now i can write a good SQL QUERY ;)
special thanks to Heikki and Bert
--
Hytham Shehab
Hello,
My perception of the InnoDB vs BDB question is that
although the BDB is very impressive and long standing,
it does not get the same level of attention that
InnoDB seems to get from the good folks at MySQL AB.
If I am not mistaken, BDB does not yet offer foreign
key support.
I have chosen
Hytham,
Tuesday, July 02, 2002, 1:54:32 AM, you wrote:
HS i have installed mysql v 3.23.44-nt on my XP using *Binary*
HS distribution, how can i now develop an InnoDB tables?
You must specify InnoDB startup options in the my.cnf/my.ini file:
At 23:52 +0300 7/2/02, Hytham Shehab wrote:
hi guys,
i use mysql 3.23.44-max-nt server, i edit c:\windows\my.ini and
c:\my.cnf and c:\mysql\data\my.cnf to include the manadatorey line to be :
innodb_data_file_path=c:/mysql/data/ibdata:300M
then, when i restart the server and start the
Lou,
I tested this on our SunOS-5.8 Sparc computer with 3.23.49:
bash-2.03$ df
/ (/dev/dsk/c0t0d0s0 ): 7499474 blocks 2033414 files
/proc (/proc ): 0 blocks 5861 files
/dev/fd(fd): 0 blocks0 files
hi Paul:
Make sure it's not being started with --skip-innodb.
i am sure that the --skip-innodb is not in any of my configuration files.
sql
--
Hytham Shehab
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.372 / Virus
Hytham,
start mysqld-max-nt from the MS-DOS prompt:
yourpathtomysqlbindir mysqld-max-nt --console
What does InnoDB print?
Regards,
Heikki
- Original Message -
From: Hytham Shehab [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.mysql
Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2002 2:24 AM
Subject: Re
hi Heikki,
i do what u said:
yourpathtomysqlbindir mysqld-max-nt --console
cannot initialize innodb as 'innodb_data_file_path' is not set
...
i sword in god that i have set this data file path as:
innodb_data_file_path=c:/mysql/data/ibdata:300M
and this is a valid directory, and some times i get
hi Heikki,
i do what u said:
yourpathtomysqlbindir mysqld-max-nt --console
cannot initialize innodb as 'innodb_data_file_path' is not set
...
i sword in god that i have set this data file path as:
innodb_data_file_path=c:/mysql/data/ibdata:300M
and this is a valid directory, and some
You need to determine if your MySQL is reading it's directives from my.ini
or my.cnf. In the correct one, make sure you have commented out or removed
any line that reads skip-innodb. then make sure you have directories set
up for the innodb files and that you've edited the paths to point to
At 15:01 -0400 6/29/02, Lou Picciano / Essex Systems wrote:
RE: MySQL 4.01-max, InnoDB, Solaris, Raw device support
Has anyone had any specific experience implementing an InnoDB tablespace
under Sparc Solaris?
A specific few lines in my.cnf would be very helpful...
As we are using a
Mikhail,
I think MySQL in this case waits for a MySQL table level lock. Note that
CREATE TABLE ... SELECT ... sets shared locks on the rows it reads in the
SELECTed table.
Workaround: use
SELECT INTO OUTFILE
+
LOAD DATA INFILE
In that way you can avoid locking altogether and do a consistent
, June 28, 2002 10:42 AM
Subject: Re: InnoDB: Lock wait timeout problem. Please help.
Mikhail,
I think MySQL in this case waits for a MySQL table level lock. Note that
CREATE TABLE ... SELECT ... sets shared locks on the rows it reads in the
SELECTed table.
Workaround: use
SELECT
: Friday, June 28, 2002 11:20 AM
Subject: Re: InnoDB: Lock wait timeout problem. Please help.
Heikki,
Thank you very much for response.
But I still don't understand why do I have lock in Conn1.
Let's go through statement again.
Conn1: begin;
Conn1: update test set name = 'rat' where id = 3
+ buf_pool-max_size);
- Original Message -
From: Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2002 4:42 PM
Subject: Re: innodb bug
Shakeel,
this may be something with 32-bit unsigned integer / signed integer
arithmetic. I assume mysqld runs
Hi,
I'm sort of glad we're not the only one having this problem.
Yesterday we had kind of the same error message on an Solaris 8 machine with
512Mb of ram.
Our buffer_pool_size was set to 250Mb, because the other 250Mb is used by
the orion-web-server.
Today I will perform crash-tests on another
Ah, that makes sense. So it potentially could be the simple matter of
telling the compiler that the type is unsigned.
--shak
Chuck Simmons wrote:
Bert --
Your problem is not the same as Shakeel's. For you, the database is
saying that it couldn't allocate memory. For Shakeel, it is
= buf_pool_get_nth_block(buf_pool, ((ulint)(ptr - frame_zero))
UNIV_PAGE_SIZE_SHIFT);
ut_a(block = buf_pool-blocks);
ut_a(block buf_pool-blocks + buf_pool-max_size);
- Original Message -
From: Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2002 4:42 PM
Subject: Re
Bert --
Your problem is not the same as Shakeel's. For you, the database is
saying that it couldn't allocate memory. For Shakeel, it is saying that
an assert failed. At about line 213, there is a right shift (X Y)
that is occuring. The behavior of a right shift is different depending
on
Shakeel,
this may be something with 32-bit unsigned integer / signed integer
arithmetic. I assume mysqld runs in the 32-bit mode?
Are you able to compile mysqld yourself? You could add the following to line
214 of mysql/innobase/include/buf0buf.ic
...
if (block buf_pool-blocks) {
Thanks alot Cal.
-Steve.
-Original Message-
From: Cal Evans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, June 21, 2002 9:38 AM
To: Steve Bradwell; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Innodb and transactions
Steve,
mysql_query('BEGIN');
if (is_object(mysql_query('Insert something
Hi Heikki.
Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why does InnoDB allocate so much memory in your case? If you follow
the memory allocation with innodb_monitor, does the allocation grow
steadily over days? Then it could be a memory leak in InnoDB.
This might be the case. I started MySQL
Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
good. I have also modified 3.23.52 so that it will generate a seg fault when
it runs out of memory. That way we will get a stack trace on Linux.
The error occered again. Now I se that I only pick 10 frames of the
stack (curse me for cut'n pasteing). If
Per,
- Original Message -
From: Per Andreas Buer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.mysql
Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2002 2:10 PM
Subject: Re: innodb keeps crashing due to out-of-memory errors.
Oh, by the way. The error does not occur if I use less memory.
please show us your
Hi Heikki.
Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Oh, by the way. The error does not occur if I use less memory.
please show us your complete my.cnf.
# This will be passed to all mysql clients
[client]
#password = my_password
port= 3306
socket =
Per,
set-variable= key_buffer=16M
set-variable= sort_buffer=1M
set-variable= record_buffer=1M
set-variable= max_allowed_packet=16M
set-variable= thread_stack=256K
set-variable = innodb_log_file_size=32M
set-variable = innodb_log_buffer_size=8M
set-variable =
Per,
- Original Message -
From: Per Andreas Buer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.mysql
Sent: Saturday, June 15, 2002 11:40 PM
Subject: Re: innodb keeps crashing due to out-of-memory errors.
Hi Heikki, thanks for replying so swiftly.
Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED
Hi Heikki, thanks for replying so swiftly.
Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
this is probably a real bug. It is trying to allocate 1.5 GB of memory in
one shot, which does not make sense. More probably the argument to the
allocator is garbage.
What MySQL version you are running?
First of all the referenced key must be on PRIMARY KEY.
But I've seen in your table definition a quite strange thing. You have a
UNIQUE and an ORDINARY key definition on the same field.
Here:
...
UNIQUE KEY `name_id` (`name_id`), - THIS IS THE FIRST DEFINITION
UNIQUE KEY `comp_name`
Heya!
You need an INDEX.
Try doing this first :
alter table ip_name_tbl add INDEX(name_id);
And add then your constraint.
EG
mysql SHOW CREATE TABLE ip_name_tbl\G
*** 1. row ***
Table: ip_name_tbl
Create Table: CREATE TABLE
On Monday 10 Jun 2002 11:17 am, you wrote:
First of all the referenced key must be on PRIMARY KEY.
...which means my 'id' -field can't be a primary key, right?
But I've seen in your table definition a quite strange thing. You have a
UNIQUE and an ORDINARY key definition on the same field.
On Monday 10 Jun 2002 11:44 am, Markus Lervik wrote:
mysql show create table ip_name_tbl\G
*** 1. row ***
Table: ip_name_tbl
Create Table: CREATE TABLE `ip_name_tbl` (
[snip]
`name_id` int(11) NOT NULL default '0',
[snip]
mysql show
: Markus Lervik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Verzonden: maandag 10 juni 2002 10:45
Aan: Kiss Dániel
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Onderwerp: Re: InnoDB foreign key constraints
On Monday 10 Jun 2002 11:17 am, you wrote:
First of all the referenced key must be on PRIMARY KEY.
...which means my 'id' -field
Weaver,
Friday, June 07, 2002, 11:28:41 PM, you wrote:
W I believe the autoextend functionality won't be available until 4.0.2.
autoextend is only supported since 3.23.50
Anyway it's not available in 4.0.1
W --Walt Weaver
W Bozeman, Montana
W -Original Message-
W From: vlady
:-)
-Original Message-
From: Kiss Dániel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 12:04 AM
To: Orr, Steve; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: InnoDB Hot Backups... ALL OR NOTHING ???
First of all, there are many aspects of your problem.
1. The InnoDB uses transaction safe table types
I believe the autoextend functionality won't be available until 4.0.2.
--Walt Weaver
Bozeman, Montana
-Original Message-
From: vlady [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 2:19 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Innodb autoextended
Hi all,
I am using mysql-4.0.1. I am
First of all, there are many aspects of your problem.
1. The InnoDB uses transaction safe table types, and uses the log files to
restore if anything goes wrong during the tsanasction. So it is almost
impossible to have a permanent database error, that cannot be repaired by
InnoDB itself. If
1201 - 1300 of 1574 matches
Mail list logo
