Hi!
Guilhem has now fixed this bug to 4.0.22.
Best regards,
Heikki
Innobase Oy
InnoDB - transactions, row level locking, and foreign keys for MySQL
InnoDB Hot Backup - a hot backup tool for InnoDB which also backs up MyISAM
tables
http://www.innodb.com/order.php
Order MySQL support from
Ian,
FILE I/O
I/O thread 0 state: waiting for i/o request (insert buffer thread)
I/O thread 1 state: waiting for i/o request (log thread)
I/O thread 2 state: waiting for i/o request (read thread)
I/O thread 3 state: waiting for i/o request (write thread)
Pending normal aio reads: 0, aio
At 09:45 PM 10/15/2004, you wrote:
Can I safely store multiple customer credit card numbers in a table that
is InnoDB, if I use an Encrypt() to encrypt the number and then decrypt
the number? The site will have a shared SSL cert on it. Please give me
tips.
No. The Encrypt function is too weak.
I am not certain that Foreign Keys (FKs) are even considered when
evaluating a SELECT statement. I know that the indexes that the FKs point
to in either table play a major role in determining the execution plan but
I don't think that the FKs actually participate in SELECT queries.
Now, does
does anybody know if Foreign keys increase the performance of select
querys?
example.
DB1 has only INNODB tables.
DB2 has the same structure as DB1 with all possible foreign keys.
is the same query faster on DB1 or DB2?
Why should it increase performance?
With regards,
Martijn Tonies
On Wednesday 13 October 2004 10:33 am, Ulrich Seppi wrote:
Hello people,
does anybody know if Foreign keys increase the performance of select
querys? example.
DB1 has only INNODB tables.
DB2 has the same structure as DB1 with all possible foreign keys.
Huh? You might want to read what a
On Wed, 6 Oct 2004, David Edwards wrote:
I've got a deadlock problem using InnoDB tables
(...)
Transaction 1:
START TRANSACTION;
DELETE FROM results WHERE id_job = 25920;
INSERT INTO results(result,id_job) VALUES (31.461937,25920);
COMMIT;
Transaction 2:
START TRANSACTION;
DELETE FROM
Hi Tobias,
Thanks for your reply. Unfortunately I couldn't see from the manual why I was getting
the deadlock - transaction 2 already has a lock on the index it is waiting for. The
difference seems to be 'insert intention' - I'm not sure what different types of
exclusive lock there are and
On Wed, Sep 22, 2004 at 01:52:36PM -0400, Debbie L wrote:
We are looking at a disk subsystem for a high transactional
application. And management wishes
to use disk appliance (IPStore or NetAPP).
Does anyone know if placing the mysql MYISAM and INNODB datafiles on
IPStore or NetApp disk
Your right, I shouldn't say supported... Is it a wise to put datafiles
on a disk appliance?
Coming from other database background, it is not wise to do such a
thing and will cause
problems when the disk appliance has problems.
As for the transaction logs, I haven't reallly thought of it, but to
On Wed, Sep 22, 2004 at 02:22:59PM -0400, Debbie L wrote:
Your right, I shouldn't say supported... Is it a wise to put
datafiles on a disk appliance? Coming from other database
background, it is not wise to do such a thing and will cause
problems when the disk appliance has problems.
Well,
We have been using innodb tables on our systems and we use netapp to
store all the tables. It will be however wise to put transaction logs
into a different netapp or somewhere else so that even if the netapp
goes kaput (highly unlikely) totally you do not lose any data.
--
MySQL General Mailing
Toro,
this might be a Linux kernel bug. What kernel are you using?
You have done very little processing, the log sequence number is only 400
MB.
Looks like a thread has been waiting for a disk read. The output shows that
the InnoDB 'event' it has waited for is already signaled. In Unix, an
Basically the application can get this message because another process has a
lock on the rows that the delete needs to cover for a time period then your
lock_wait_timeout. Is there some cron process? Is the table index properly?
What your average query transaction?
Active your slow query log to
when it happened
originally.
-Original Message-
From: Dathan Vance Pattishall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 2:49 PM
To: Tucker, Gabriel; 'Mysql General (E-mail)'
Subject: RE: Innodb Message Lock wait timeout exceeded; Try restarting
transaction
Basically
Thanks for the reply, much appreciated.
this might be a Linux kernel bug. What kernel are you using?
/proc/version
Linux version 2.4.26-ow1 ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) (gcc version 3.2.2 20030222 (Red
Hat Linux 3.2.2-5)) #3 Wed Apr 28 13:39:23 NZST 2004
The problem had been happening approximately once a
Stuart Felenstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
InnoDB free: 10240 kB
Does this mean the actual space provided for the
records it can hold ?
Approximately.
--
For technical support contracts, goto https://order.mysql.com/?ref=ensita
This email is sponsored by Ensita.net
Hi,
This is the free space left in the InnoDB file. InnoDB will claim all the
space that it is configured for and if autoextend is turned on it will use
additional space when needed until the file limit is reached.
For example my current configuration is
innodb_data_file_path
Hi Michael,
I made some changes to the sql statments to create the
ENROLLS table as follows:
CREATE TABLE ENROLLS
(courseID SMALLINT NOT NULL,
sectionID SMALLINT NOT NULL,
studentID SMALLINT NOT NULL,
grade SMALLINT)TYPE=INNODB;
PRIMARY KEY(courseID,sectionID,studentID),
INDEX(courseID),
FOREIGN
Mulugeta Maru wrote:
Hi Michael,
I made some changes to the sql statments to create the
ENROLLS table as follows:
CREATE TABLE ENROLLS
(
courseID SMALLINT NOT NULL,
sectionID SMALLINT NOT NULL,
studentID SMALLINT NOT NULL,
grade SMALLINT)TYPE=INNODB;
^
You
--- Michael Stassen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Mulugeta Maru wrote:
Hi Michael,
I made some changes to the sql statments to create
the
ENROLLS table as follows:
CREATE TABLE ENROLLS
(
courseID SMALLINT NOT NULL,
sectionID SMALLINT NOT NULL,
studentID SMALLINT NOT
Mulugeta Maru wrote:
--- Michael Stassen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mulugeta Maru wrote:
Hi Michael,
I made some changes to the sql statments to create the
ENROLLS table as follows:
** Did you read this part? **
CREATE TABLE ENROLLS
(
courseID SMALLINT NOT NULL,
sectionID SMALLINT NOT
I am sorry. I did not remove TYPE=INNODB in the middle
of the statment. You are right. I am now getting a
different error message;
ERROR 1005 at line 33: Can't creat table
'.\enrollment1\enrolls.frm' (errno: 150)
All the tables except enrolls is created. What am I
doing wrong again?
Regards.
Mulugeta Maru wrote:
I was able to create all the tables below except
ENROLLS. Can anyone please help me what is wrong in my
syntax in the section that faild to create the ENROLLS
table.
snip
CREATE TABLE ENROLLS
(
enrollmentID INT NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
courseID SMALLINT NOT NULL,
Mayuran Yogarajah [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Each |MyISAM| table is stored on disk in three files. The files have
names that
begin with the table name and have an extension to indicate the file type.
An `.frm' file stores the table definition. The data file has an `.MYD'
(MYData) extension.
Mayuran Yogarajah wrote:
From the MySQL docs:
Each |MyISAM| table is stored on disk in three files. The files have
names that
begin with the table name and have an extension to indicate the file
type.
An `.frm' file stores the table definition. The data file has an `.MYD'
(MYData) extension.
Marvin Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We have just recently moved 1 of our InnoDB cache servers to a new much
bigger machine, 4 CPU, 8GB Ram and masses amount of disk space available
from a SAN. The OS is Redhat AS 3 with kernel 2.4. MySQL is the only
application on this machine and its
sean c peters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am in the process of upgrading one of my systems to use InnoDB tables, along
with some other tweaks to my code. In any case, i just tried to delete around
7000 records from a table, where there are 9 other tables that will cascade
delete when rows
PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: InnoDB TableSpace Question
Oracle cannot shrink datafiles (same idea as InnoDB datafiles) when data
is deleted either.
David
Marc Slemko wrote:
On Tue, 3 Aug 2004 12:42:03 -0400 , David Seltzer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Thanks Marc,
Is there really no way to reclaim unused
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Jeff Mathis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
my understanding is that the datafiles are created when the server
initializes, and this this is the designed and expected behavior. Most
other database products use a similar model. Your scenario cannot
happen. You specify
Carlos Proal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How stable is this feature? , i have been using it for a few time and works
fine, but im thinking to move my current productive enviroment this way and
i dont know if its a good choice.
Any advise is appreciated.
It is stable. :)
--
For
David Griffiths writes:
Oracle cannot shrink datafiles (same idea as InnoDB datafiles) when data
is deleted either.
Actually, Oracle has been able to resize data files since 7.2. It
is usually done with an 'alter tablespace ... coalesce' followed by an
'alter tablespace datafile ... resize
On Tue, 3 Aug 2004 10:07:25 -0400 , David Seltzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
I've been searching the archives mysql documentation for a while and I
can't seem to find an answer to my question -
Is there a way to force InnoDB to shrink its filesize? I just dropped a 7GB
table, but
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: InnoDB TableSpace Question
On Tue, 3 Aug 2004 10:07:25 -0400 , David Seltzer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi all,
I've been searching the archives mysql documentation for a while and I
can't seem to find an answer to my question -
Is there a way to force InnoDB
On Tue, 3 Aug 2004 12:42:03 -0400 , David Seltzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks Marc,
Is there really no way to reclaim unused space in an InnoDB table space? If
not, why is this not considered a tremendous limitation?
Some do consider it a tremendous limitation. It all depends on how it
: Tuesday, August 03, 2004 12:31 PM
To: David Seltzer
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: InnoDB TableSpace Question
On Tue, 3 Aug 2004 10:07:25 -0400 , David Seltzer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi all,
I've been searching the archives mysql documentation for a while and
I
can't seem
:09 PM
To: David Seltzer
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: InnoDB TableSpace Question
I agree with David. If there is no present way to recover unused InnoDB
tablespace, then we (as a community) seriously need to create a tool to do
just that. How have we gone so long without it? I always
Seltzer
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: InnoDB TableSpace Question
On Tue, 3 Aug 2004 10:07:25 -0400 , David Seltzer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi all,
I've been searching the archives mysql documentation for a while and
I
can't seem to find an answer to my question -
Is there a way to force
: Tuesday, August 03, 2004 12:31 PM
To: David Seltzer
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: InnoDB TableSpace Question
On Tue, 3 Aug 2004 10:07:25 -0400 , David Seltzer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
I've been searching the archives mysql documentation for a while
and
I
can't seem to find
On Tue, Aug 03, 2004 at 01:08:58PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree with David. If there is no present way to recover unused
InnoDB tablespace, then we (as a community) seriously need to create
a tool to do just that. How have we gone so long without it?
Because it's just not a
Oracle cannot shrink datafiles (same idea as InnoDB datafiles) when data
is deleted either.
David
Marc Slemko wrote:
On Tue, 3 Aug 2004 12:42:03 -0400 , David Seltzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks Marc,
Is there really no way to reclaim unused space in an InnoDB table space? If
not, why is
Actually, Oracle can shrink or grow datafiles:
ALTER DATABASE DATAFILE '/usr01/oracle/sid/data001' resize 200M;
On Aug 3, 2004, at 15:59, David Griffiths wrote:
Oracle cannot shrink datafiles (same idea as InnoDB datafiles) when
data is deleted either.
David
Marc Slemko wrote:
On Tue, 3 Aug 2004
Thanks Mike,
I've always ignored CHECK TABLE because I always thought it was
just for MyISAM.
I ran CHECK TABLE. It told me that my table was corrupt. I then
dumped the table with mysqldump and recreated it. After that
CHECK TABLE said it was OK (and in comparing values with the master
server
Hi!
On Aug 01, Keith Thompson wrote:
Thanks Mike,
I've always ignored CHECK TABLE because I always thought it was
just for MyISAM.
Then, I decided to run CHECK TABLE on all my tables (which for the
ones with 125 million rows will probably be running for a while).
The problem now is that
Hi Sergei,
I did come from 4.0.17 to 4.1.3 with a complete dump/reload.
Then, all changes after that forward came via replication.
I didn't read anything about corruption problems as a replication
slave.
-keith
Hi!
On Aug 01, Keith Thompson wrote:
Thanks Mike,
I've always ignored CHECK
At 01:21 AM 8/1/2004, Keith Thompson wrote:
Thanks Mike,
I've always ignored CHECK TABLE because I always thought it was
just for MyISAM.
I ran CHECK TABLE. It told me that my table was corrupt. I then
dumped the table with mysqldump and recreated it. After that
CHECK TABLE said it was OK (and
Hey Mike,
Thanks again for your suggestions.
I understand (and agree) with your comments about a clean shutdown.
I'm always careful to do that. In this case, the mysql server has
only been shutdown a couple times and it was a clean shutdown in
each case.
You suggest running table checks daily.
At 12:55 PM 8/1/2004, Keith Thompson wrote:
Hey Mike,
Thanks again for your suggestions.
I understand (and agree) with your comments about a clean shutdown.
I'm always careful to do that. In this case, the mysql server has
only been shutdown a couple times and it was a clean shutdown in
each
On Sat, 31 Jul 2004 17:50:38 -0500, Keith Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I just discovered that two of my tables (out of about 300)
show a very unusual behavior. This is that select count(*) ...
and selecting all the rows and counting them do not produce
the same number.
This is on
Hi Marc,
Thanks for you response. In answer to your questions, there are no
embedded newlines and I did look at index issues. I did not try
rebuilding the index, which would be easy to do in this case since
the tables are small (unlike a couple of my other tables that have
125+ million rows and
At 07:07 PM 7/31/2004, you wrote:
Hi Marc,
Thanks for you response. In answer to your questions, there are no
embedded newlines and I did look at index issues. I did not try
rebuilding the index, which would be easy to do in this case since
the tables are small (unlike a couple of my other
,
Sp.Raja
Original Message
From: Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, Jul-27-2004 6:24 PM
Subject: Re: Innodb assertion failure after binary backup-restore
Hi!
sync will not help.
You can run SHOW INNODB STATUS\G to monitor when InnoDB
Hi!
- Original Message -
From: Sp.Raja [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.myodbc
Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 5:52 PM
Subject: Re: Innodb assertion failure after binary backup-restore
Thanks for your replies.
Now I have three ways to go
1. replication=20
2
Hi!
That method will not work. InnoDB must be quiet long enough so that it has
time to flush all the contents of the buffer pool to the data files.
Best regards,
Heikki Tuuri
Innobase Oy
Foreign keys, transactions, and row level locking for MySQL
InnoDB Hot Backup - a hot backup tool for InnoDB
From: Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, Jul-27-2004 1:05 PM
Subject: Re: Innodb assertion failure after binary backup-restore
Hi!
That method will not work. InnoDB must be quiet long enough so that it
has
time to flush all the contents of the buffer
http://www.innodb.com/order.php
Order MySQL support from http://www.mysql.com/support/index.html
- Alkuperinen viesti -
Lhettj: Sp.Raja [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Vastaanottaja: Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Kopio: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Lhetetty: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 3:42 PM
Aihe: Re: Innodb
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Sp.Raja [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi,
I was able to solve this by calling sync command, as my previous mail say.
Do you mean to say this will not work regardless of the whether we
sync or not??
If it happens to work, then only by incident. I wouldn't rely on
From: Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, Jul-27-2004 6:24 PM
Subject: Re: Innodb assertion failure after binary backup-restore
Hi!
sync will not help.
You can run SHOW INNODB STATUS\G to monitor when InnoDB has flushed its
buffer pool.
Best regards
Hi List,
I figured out the fix for it. I need to do a sync and wait for the sync to get over
and take a backup.
Thanks,
Sp.Raja
Original Message
From: Sp.Raja [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, Jul-23-2004 8:03 PM
Subject: Re: Innodb assertion
In some cases mysql crashes while restore is trying to destroy persistent databases
and mysql.err says
000121 21:02:23 InnoDB: Database was not shut down normally.
InnoDB: Starting recovery from log files...
InnoDB: Starting log scan based on checkpoint at
InnoDB: log sequence number 0 867418
Kieran Kelleher wrote:
Does anyone out there have a suggested innodb parameters or even a
working set of params that I could start with.
The InnoDB manual gives good suggestion. Some minor comments (none
particularly OS X specific, but InnoDB works fine on it)
innodb_buffer_pool_size is very
Kieran,
The InnoDB tablespace may span multiple files and may even be configured to
use raw devices, thus, the filesystem really doesn't limit the maximum
InnoDB tablespace size. The maximum InnoDB tablespace size is 64TB.
Eg. of multiple files/devices
I highly recommend simply using ext3 for your Linux
setup. The 1 or 2 percent performance benefit that
you may get from raw partitions is way outweighed by
complexness of backups of the raw data.
either way:
First I would suggest you read the Linux RAID howto:
InnoDB data is kept in the ib* files. Did you explicitly create a directory
for your innoDB files?
-Original Message-
From: Sagara Wijetunga
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 7/6/04 8:16 AM
Subject: InnoDB table data
Hi all
We allocate a limited amount of disk space for user's
home directory
Sagara Wijetunga [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can see his MyISAM *.frm, *.MYD and *.MYI are kept
under his database directory.
But I can see only table.frm are in his database
directory for InnoDB tables. It looks like InnoDB
table data belongs to his database are not kept under
his
--- Egor Egorov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sagara Wijetunga [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can see his MyISAM *.frm, *.MYD and *.MYI are
kept
under his database directory.
But I can see only table.frm are in his database
directory for InnoDB tables. It looks like InnoDB
table data
Heikki Tuuri wrote:
Mitch,
please send the FULL .err log to me.
Hey Heikki,
Not sure you want that, the file is 44MB uncompressed, and only talks
about the errors reading communication packets. Makes for some really
boring reading ;) The InnoDB error I managed to figure out - I once
upped
Mitch,
- Alkuperinen viesti -
Lhettj: Mitch Pirtle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Vastaanottaja: Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Kopio: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Lhetetty: Monday, July 05, 2004 4:26 PM
Aihe: Re: InnoDB and long semaphore waits
Heikki Tuuri wrote:
Mitch,
please send the FULL .err log
Heikki Tuuri wrote:
Not sure you want that, the file is 44MB uncompressed, and only talks
about the errors reading communication packets. Makes for some really
boring reading ;) The InnoDB error I managed to figure out - I once
upped max_connections without doing the math, and the machine was
Mitch,
please send the FULL .err log to me.
Best regards,
Heikki
- Original Message -
From: Mitch Pirtle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.myodbc
Sent: Saturday, July 03, 2004 4:41 PM
Subject: InnoDB and long semaphore waits
Hi listers,
I just got here, so please let
Keep in my mind that if something does go `wrong` you could possibly have to
wait hours for all of your transactions to roll back.
-Original Message-
From: Michael Lee
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED] '
Sent: 6/28/04 9:35 PM
Subject: RE: INNODB transaction log size
Victor,
Thanks for your reply
I do not believe this is currently an option in the `load data infile`
syntax. One option would be to read the file programmatically and issue the
commits after `x` number of inserts.
-Original Message-
From: Michael Lee
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 6/28/04 1:21 AM
Subject: INNODB
Victor,
Thanks for your reply.
Actually, i cannot find such an option and want to see if i have missed something.
Referring to Innodb transaction log, I do some more searching and would like to
confirm what i found from the web (this information is not available in MySQL
documentation)
.
i have been reading..
and i have found 3 ways to have a copy of mysql master datas for initilize the
mysql slave
( always having in mind innodb compatibility )
1)
FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK
see the 'SHOW MASTER STATUS' sentence
shutdown master database
copy all data, log and .frm files
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i have read multiple websites and posts.. and this mail list archive
but i have not found the answer to the question:
how is it possible to do a backup of a innodb table?
i have read: try to use mysqldump.. but this does not work right
i
thx thx :D
thats work right.
the only problem is that mysqldump dont write the 'set FOREIGN_KEY_CHECKS'
sentences until version 4.1.1:
To make it easier to reload dump files for tables that have foreign key
relationships, mysqldump automatically includes a statement in the dump
output to
The simplest thing to do is set up a replication slave and run a script
every night that shuts down the MySQL slave, performs the backup, and
then restarts MySQL. We have a dedicated XServe running MySQL and we
use another XServe whose primary function is filesharing to also act as
a
that is just what we want to do..
but it isnt The simplest thing to do as you say
:P
i am studying this:
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/mysql/en/Replication_HOWTO.html
thx another time
d2clon
On Thursday 24 June 2004 15:22, Kieran Kelleher wrote:
The simplest thing to do is set up a replication
I have just documented how I set it up a new slave last week to
replicate against an existing master and it was really easier than I
expected. It works like a charm so far. Here is the instructions
http://homepage.mac.com/kelleherk/iblog/C711669388/E351220100/index.html
I hope this helps
Carlos Sunden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
InnoDB is included in binary distributions by default as of MySQL 4.0.
Hello
Is InnoDb always used when installing MySQL whether RPM or binary is used?
Yes.
If you don't need InnoDB, start MySQL server with --skip-innodb option.
I am not
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 15 June 2004 10:43 am, Carlos Sunden wrote:
I am not completely sure what this is although I've read about it.
www.innodb.com.. Gives you all the info you can handle.
Jeff
- --
Not quite human any longer.
-BEGIN
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anybody know how do I know if innoDB is enabled?
SHOW VARIABLES LIKE have_innodb;
If InnoDB is enabled, you will see 'YES' in the output.
I have MySQL 3.23 installed. The MySQL document says the simplest way to
install MySQL-Max is to replace the executable
Boyd,
- Original Message -
From: Boyd E. Hemphill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.myodbc
Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 5:02 AM
Subject: innodb FK column rename
All:
What are the consequences of renaming a column in a child table that is
the FK to the parent? Will
Paul West [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here are some easy questions I hope you can answer.
I have been creating innoDB tables in mysql, creating contraints and foreign keys
and it
runs swimmingly.
The server I am now doing mySQL on won't allow me to create other than myISAM tables.
Is it
Matt Mastrangelo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How can an InnoDB table be created with case sensitive collation? The
example below creates two identical tables, one MyISAM and the other
InnoDB. The InnoDB fails when inserting primary keys that differ in case
only. What am I doing wrong?
Which
I'm using version 4.1.1-alpha, running on RedHat Linux 9.
Victoria Reznichenko wrote:
Matt Mastrangelo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How can an InnoDB table be created with case sensitive collation? The
example below creates two identical tables, one MyISAM and the other
InnoDB. The InnoDB fails
, 2004 4:00 PM
Subject: Re: InnoDB case sensitive collation
Matt Mastrangelo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How can an InnoDB table be created with case sensitive collation? The
example below creates two identical tables, one MyISAM and the other
InnoDB. The InnoDB fails when inserting primary keys
David,
- Original Message -
From: David Griffiths [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.myodbc
Sent: Friday, May 14, 2004 8:05 PM
Subject: Re: InnodB Hot Backup Questions
Sorry - haven't had a chance to respond till now.
So restore == apply-log, but one works on any
On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 01:40:37PM +1000, Chris Nolan wrote:
Jeremy Zawodny wrote:
I think that the problem is that it's *not* a 64 bit OS. It's just an
Intel 32bit box with 4GB of memory. And sine MySQL doesn't do PAE,
it'll never see that extra memory.
Didn't InnoDB gain PAE
On 14 May 2004, at 1:14 am, Dathan Vance Pattishall wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Jeremy Zawodny [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2004 4:03 PM
To: Dathan Vance Pattishall
Cc: 'Tim Cutts'; 'MySQL List'
Subject: Re: InnoDB filesystem
On Thu, May 13, 2004 at 04:51:27PM
Sorry - haven't had a chance to respond till now.
So restore == apply-log, but one works on any computer, and the
other
only works on the computer that it's node locked to.
--apply-log works also in any computer regardless of the hostname or the
license expiration date.
I'm running
On 13 May 2004, at 3:34 pm, Dan Nelson wrote:
Pros: performance and bypassing the filesystem cache.
I believe most OSes support direct file access which either bypasses or
minimizes cache effects, and InnoDB will enable it if possible.
Solaris direct file I/O performance on UFS is within a couple
David,
- Original Message -
From: David Griffiths [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.myodbc
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2004 7:50 AM
Subject: InnodB Hot Backup Questions
I'm hoping someone on the list has some experience with the tool
(specifically, restoring a backup), as
Hi!
- Original Message -
From: mayuran [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.myodbc
Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2004 7:56 PM
Subject: Innodb - next key locking
I have a perl script which fork()'s many children and each
child is updating a table, and each child is
Hi!
- Original Message -
From: mayuran [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.myodbc
Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 11:11 PM
Subject: innodb log
When I do a SHOW INNODB STATUS i see a query which is
waiting for a lock to be released, but innodb status
doesnt show the whole
On Thu, May 13, 2004 at 11:00:17AM +0200, JFL wrote:
I've been told that InnoDB on a raw partition is the fastest setup.
Actually, you've been told that it's probably the fastest.
To setup my system for this, could I create a partition called /innodb
and adjust the my.cnf like this?
I've been told that InnoDB on a raw partition is the fastest setup.
Actually, you've been told that it's probably the fastest.
Correct. Sorry :)
Check the InnoDB docs. They explain how to setup raw disk
partitions. You'll be using device names, not mount points.
Thanks. I forgot to check the
In the last episode (May 13), JFL said:
I've been told that InnoDB on a raw partition is the fastest setup.
Actually, you've been told that it's probably the fastest.
Correct. Sorry :)
Check the InnoDB docs. They explain how to setup raw disk
partitions. You'll be using device names,
-Original Message-
From: Lou Olsten [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2004 6:45 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: InnoDB Questions
Need someone with some insight or experience with InnoDB (Heikki?? :-)
a) Where does InnoDB store all of this information (such as
-Original Message-
From: Tim Cutts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2004 7:11 AM
To: MySQL List
Subject: Re: InnoDB filesystem
On 13 May 2004, at 3:34 pm, Dan Nelson wrote:
Pros: performance and bypassing the filesystem cache.
MySQL can't use all
601 - 700 of 1574 matches
Mail list logo
