Mauro,
- Original Message -
From: Mauro Marcellino [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.myodbc
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 6:51 PM
Subject: Re: InnoDB Backups
By open file tool I mean software that works concurrently with a backup
suite such as veritas that would backup
Mauro,
- Original Message -
From: Mauro Marcellino [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.myodbc
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2004 10:44 PM
Subject: InnoDB Backups
--=_NextPart_000_00CE_01C3E67E.9D867B90
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=iso-8859-1
the only two ways to do an online backup of InnoDB tables is InnoDB Hot
backup or mysqldump?
Thanks,
Mauro
- Original Message -
From: Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 4:22 AM
Subject: Re: InnoDB Backups
Mauro,
- Original Message
is InnoDB
Hot
backup or mysqldump?
Thanks,
Mauro
- Original Message -
From: Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 4:22 AM
Subject: Re: InnoDB Backups
Mauro,
- Original Message -
From: Mauro Marcellino [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups
Kev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I just ran mysql 4.0.15 on a Mac for the first time and got the following in
my .err file:
InnoDB: a new database to be created!
040128 7:40:24 InnoDB: Setting file ./ibdata1 size to 10 MB
InnoDB: Database physically writes the file full: wait...
040128
Gitte und Ingolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi out there,
i.m using InnoDB with foreign key constraints and i.m looking for the
default behavior of ON DELETE and ON UPDATE.
Secondly, what does the ON UPDATE NO ACTION option means? Ist the way it is
used in db2, that every child row must have
Chris,
InnoDB file format changes:
4.1.0 - 4.1.1 introduced multiple tablespaces;
4.1.1 - 4.1.2 or .3allow multiple charsets in the same database
installation (currently only the default charset is used in InnoDB);
5.0.0 - 5.0.x create all new InnoDB tables in a
In theory it is fastest to add indexes first, then disable it (ALTER
TABLE x DISABLE KEYS), then add data and, on the end, re-enable keys
(ALTER TABLE x DISABLE KEYS).
mirza
Keith Thompson wrote:
Hello all,
I need to load a new InnoDB table with about 80 million rows.
With MyISAM I have often
:04 AM
Subject: Re: InnoDB loading: add keys before or after
In theory it is fastest to add indexes first, then disable it (ALTER
TABLE x DISABLE KEYS), then add data and, on the end, re-enable keys
(ALTER TABLE x DISABLE KEYS).
mirza
Keith Thompson wrote:
Hello all,
I need to load a new
: mailing.database.myodbc
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 11:04 AM
Subject: Re: InnoDB loading: add keys before or after
In theory it is fastest to add indexes first, then disable it (ALTER
TABLE x DISABLE KEYS), then add data and, on the end, re-enable keys
(ALTER TABLE x DISABLE KEYS).
mirza
.
Regards,
Heikki
- Original Message -
From: Keith Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 4:46 PM
Subject: Re: InnoDB loading: add keys before or after
Heikki,
Thanks for your help.
I have another very
Hi there,
Patrick Fowler wrote:
Do I have to
compile from source with the innoDB flag in order to use the innoDB
tables or just in stall the RPM?
As I am using flawlessly working InnoDB tables on an RPM installation of
MySQL, I can say: no need to compile from source for InnoDB use.
Fred
--
List: MySQL General Discussion Previous MessageNext Message
From: Heikki Tuuri Date: January 21 2004 4:32am
Subject: Re: InnoDB locking 'non-existence' of a row
Alex,
diagram:
record1 'gap' record2
(User A holds a next-key lock on record2)
InnoDB can lock the non
Alex,
- Original Message -
From: Zeltser, Alex [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.myodbc
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 10:28 PM
Subject: RE: InnoDB locking 'non-existence' of a row
Hello Heikki,
Thank you for your reply and your explanation. It clarifies things
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: InnoDB locking 'non-existence' of a row
Hi Alex!
On Sat, 2004-01-17 at 05:50, Zeltser, Alex wrote:
Hi,
I wanted to take advantage of the InnoDB 'gap' locking to lock
'non-existence' of a row, the way the manual recommends. I tried to
do this by using
'
non-existence of a row?
Thanks in advance,
Alex
-Original Message-
From: Chris Nolan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, January 16, 2004 4:55 PM
To: Zeltser, Alex
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: InnoDB locking 'non-existence' of a row
Hi Alex!
On Sat, 2004
]
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 11:00 AM
To: Zeltser, Alex
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: InnoDB locking 'non-existence' of a row
hi,
Selecting a non-existent row won't acquire any locks that prevents inserts from
happening. One way
to accomplish what you want is to create a separate insert
I forgot to mention too that this is the 64bit MySQL 4.0.17
running on Solaris9.
Hi all,
I decided I needed another index in an InnoDB table that has about
25 million rows (each 80 bytes long). As I've done dozens of times
with MyISAM tables, I did a simple alter table:
alter table
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.myodbc
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 3:50 AM
Subject: Re: InnoDB key adding slowness
I forgot to mention too that this is the 64bit MySQL 4.0.17
running on Solaris9.
Hi all,
I decided I needed another index in an InnoDB table that has about
for InnoDB which also backs up MyISAM
tables
Order MySQL technical support from https://order.mysql.com/
- Original Message -
From: Zeltser, Alex [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.myodbc
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 9:20 PM
Subject: RE: InnoDB locking 'non-existence
Hi Alex!
On Sat, 2004-01-17 at 05:50, Zeltser, Alex wrote:
Hi,
I wanted to take advantage of the InnoDB 'gap' locking to lock 'non-existence' of a
row, the way the
manual recommends. I tried to do this by using 'select ... for update', using the
'mysql' client
from two separate
Backup - a hot backup tool for InnoDB which also backs up MyISAM
tables
Order MySQL support from http://www.mysql.com/support/index.html
From: Franky Van Liedekerke ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Subject: Re: innodb defragmentation question
View: Complete Thread (4 articles)
Original Format
the problem is that, if it happens again, I get a file of 900 MB, which
gets kinda big ... In order to rectify the situation after that, I'll
need to dump all innodb tables, drop them and reinsert them. This would
takes hours, and in the meantime the application running on top of it
would be
Franky,
since MySQL performs
ALTER TABLE ... TYPE = InnoDB;
by totally rebuilding the table, it is very normal that the space usage
temporarily doubles in ibdata files.
But if it doubles also after an immediate SECOND rebuild, then that must be
a bug. If you can reproduce that phenomenon,
On Mon, Dec 22, 2003 at 04:57:00PM +0200, Eli Hen wrote:
Hello,
My HDD is running low and I MyISAM tables are keep crashing...
Are the MyISAM tables crashing *because* you're low on space? If so,
you need more space, *not* a new table type.
I think that converting to InnoDB will be more
j,
how you have set
innodb_thread_concurrency
and
innodb_log_file_size
in my.cnf?
I was able to repeat the assertion failure by setting the log file size to
only 8 MB, and setting concurrency to 500. I changed now InnoDB so that it
no longer asserts, but calls exit(1). It prints the
In my experience, I see about a 2x increase in space required between
MyISAM and InnoDB. I believe this may be documented btw, check the
InnoDB section of the manual.
I have been using InnoDB for a couple years now on databases up to
180GB. InnoDB has been very robust and I have only once come
Russ,
you can also use
mysqldump --single-transaction
to back up InnoDB type tables. The advantage of InnoDB Hot Backup over that
method is that InnoDB Hot Backup takes binary backups of the ibdata files.
Restoring a binary backup is much faster than a table dump.
Best regards,
Heikki Tuuri
Andrew,
SELECT [STRAIGHT_JOIN]
[SQL_SMALL_RESULT] [SQL_BIG_RESULT] [SQL_BUFFER_RESULT]
[SQL_CACHE | SQL_NO_CACHE] [SQL_CALC_FOUND_ROWS] [HIGH_PRIORITY]
[DISTINCT | DISTINCTROW | ALL]
select_expression,...
[INTO {OUTFILE | DUMPFILE} 'file_name' export_options]
Carlos,
- Original Message -
From: Carlos Proal [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.myodbc
Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 4:09 AM
Subject: Innodb multiple tablespaces benchmark
Hi all, specially to Heikki.
Its really amazing that multiple tablespaces are available
Harald Falkenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
is it possible to use as a default INNODB instead of ISAM in a mysql
server, so that every table, database (at least the complete server) is
based on a INNODB tablespace? Is this a practical and good way to use
mysql in that setup, if possible?
At 22:06 +0100 12/16/03, Harald Falkenberg wrote:
Hallo,
is it possible to use as a default INNODB instead of ISAM in a mysql
server, so that every table, database (at least the complete server) is
based on a INNODB tablespace? Is this a practical and good way to use
mysql in that setup, if
InnoDB is extremely stable!
I have a single InnoDB database that's currently holding about 20GB
(with about 95% of that in a single table).
All of this database is contained inside a single InnoDB tablespace
file. In the last 12 months, the only command
I've thrown at it by hand was ALTER
Is innodb stable enough to use un mass production environement ?
Yes, it's.
We use it on a 24x7 system (replicated), with 20GB w/no issues. We're using
4.0.16 on NetWare6.5.
Eduardo
- Original Message -
From: Nicolas Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December
PROTECTED]
To: 'Eduardo D Piovesam' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 1:38 PM
Subject: RE: Innodb in production
How are you doing backups???
-Original Message-
From: Eduardo D Piovesam [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 10:31 AM
To: Nicolas Ross
On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 10:13:44AM -0500, Nicolas Ross wrote:
Hi !
Our db server has about 140+ db's for a total of about 1.5 gigs of data.
Some while ago, for a specific DB, I did testing using transaction tables
with bdb. This was a bad experience. I ran into some problems and I had to
Hi,
I did some tests earlier where I inserted 100,000 rows into a
table (table definition below). First, I did it without using
transactions and it took 243 seconds approximately. Then, I
did the same test using transactions, and it took 28 seconds.
I am using MySQL v4. Here is the
Bill,
I tested this on the latest 4.1.1 snapshot, and it worked ok: client 2
waited for client 1 to commit. Please test again.
Best regards,
Heikki
Innobase Oy
http://www.innodb.com
InnoDB - transactions, row level locking, and foreign keys for MySQL
InnoDB Hot Backup - hot backup tool for
Bruce,
I am not able to repeat the crash. I tested on Linux with 4.0.17.
You have the index
KEY `jiveForum_name_idx` (`name`(10)),
The bug is probably in the column prefix index. That feature was introduced
in 4.0.14. Did you create the table with a version 4.0.14? What kinds of
operations
Thanks Heikki, I'll send those along a little later today. I believe that
there is a second row in the table that has the name value Technical
Questions: API... If I am reading your comments correctly we are running
into a problem where the Key is limited to the first ten characters and
therefore
On Fri, Nov 21, 2003 at 01:15:52PM -0700, Matt Sturtz wrote:
Thanks for the quick reply--
Yes, this is a common strategy, actually.
Any tricks to getting the tables converted on the master without the
slaves knowing about it (IE how can I do 'alter table' on the master
without it being
At 11:36 -0700 11/21/03, Matt Sturtz wrote:
Hello,
We run a master-slave configuration and are considering migrating a few
tables to InnoDB to get transaction capability...
Question is, can we keep the tables as MyISAM on the slaves to maintain
the high-speed accesses? I suppose this would
Thanks for the quick reply--
Yes, this is a common strategy, actually.
Any tricks to getting the tables converted on the master without the
slaves knowing about it (IE how can I do 'alter table' on the master
without it being executed on the slaves)?
Transactions are not written to the binary
Mulugeta Maru [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My background is Micorosoft Access and SQL server. The InnoDB table type
gives me a much close option to move my databases. I found the database a
little complex and would like to know if there is a better step-by-step
explanation of setting up InnoDB
Margrit,
fix the problem that leads to OS error number 17.
What does perror tell you about it?
Regards,
Frank.
Margrit Lottmann schrieb:
Following errors we've got by restarting mysqld
031114 10:26:51 mysqld started
InnoDB: Fatal error: cannot read from file. OS error number 17.
Margrit,
your disk or file system is probably broken:
InnoDB: Fatal error: cannot read from file. OS error number 17.
17 EEXIST File exists
The error number does not make sense in a file read. Strange.
You cannot remove ib_logfiles from an InnoDB installation. They are as
important as ibdata
Hi Hsiu-Hui,
I havent followed the threat, excuse if this was mentioned before.
Did you try to start the server with the
--skip-innodb
option yet ?
--
kind regards
Nils Valentin
Tokyo/Japan
http://www.be-known-online.com/mysql/
On Thursday 13 November 2003 17:38, Hsiu-Hui Tseng wrote:
it everything comes to a halt for
a good 30-40 seconds.
I can't make these long queries any faster. What can I do?
Thanks,
Nihal
-Original Message-
From: Matt W [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 7:09 PM
To: Nihal; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: INNODB flush
on the disk controller.
Jeremy
-Original Message-
From: Matt W [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 7:09 PM
To: Nihal; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: INNODB flush holdup
Hi,
I don't know what your previous problem was, but I don't think it
affects my answer
I am running FLUSH TABLES manually. I am doing it each hour to generate
a bin file, for incremental backups.
-Original Message-
From: Jeremy Zawodny [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 10:05 AM
To: Nihal
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: INNODB flush holdup
(ofcourse
other than root) can see the data.
For more info, have a look at:
http://www.mysql.com/doc/en/InnoDB_File_space.html
Enjoy
Nitin
- Original Message -
From: Leo Huang [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 8:00 PM
Subject: Re: InnoDB Questions
, change the cfg file and remove the ibdata file.
At startup it should create the new larger file, then you can import the
dumped data.
Marvin.
-Original Message-
From: Leo Huang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 05 November 2003 07:40
To: Nitin
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: InnoDB
No, files can be bigger than 2GB. In OSX prior to Panther there is a
2GB per-process memory limit though. Then again, on anything other than
the PowerMac G5 this doesn't matter because the G5 is the only Mac that
can hold more than 2GB of RAM.
- Gabriel
On Tuesday, November 4, 2003, at 04:42
On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 12:08:29PM +1100, Chris Nolan wrote:
To my knowledge, ext2 does have the [2GB filesize] limitation but
ext3 does not.
ext2 does not have this limitation. It was never a limitation of the
filesystem, only kernel/glibc. On 64bit architectures ext2 has been
handling large
If I recall correctly, the G5, the mighty PowerPC 970, is used by
Apple just as Windows currently uses the mighty Hammer series from AMD -
as a souped up 32-bit processor.
Regards,
Chris
Gabriel Ricard wrote:
No, files can be bigger than 2GB. In OSX prior to Panther there is a
2GB
How about we just all agree that SCO's OSes can't handle large files,
and therefore should all be avoided in favour of completely superior
OSes, like FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Linux, NetBSD and DOS 2.11
Regards,
Chris
Pete Harlan wrote:
On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 12:08:29PM +1100, Chris Nolan
Hi,
I don't know what your previous problem was, but I don't think it
affects my answer. :-)
This isn't specific to InnoDB. Yes, when you FLUSH TABLES, all new
queries wait for that to complete (as indicated by Waiting for table
in PROCESSLIST). And the tables can't all be flushed (closed) until
Hello,
first things first, you cann't resize your datafiles without shutting down
your database. if it's ok with you, have a look at
http://www.mysql.com/doc/en/Adding_and_removing.html
you may want to have a look at you my.cnf file, stored in mysql data dir or
in /etc dir, for the default
, November 05, 2003 1:01 AM
Subject: Re: InnoDB Questions
Hello,
first things first, you cann't resize your datafiles without
shutting down
your database. if it's ok with you, have a look at
http://www.mysql.com/doc/en/Adding_and_removing.html
you may want to have a look at you my.cnf file
at:
http://www.mysql.com/doc/en/InnoDB_File_space.html
Enjoy
Nitin
- Original Message -
From: Leo Huang [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 8:00 PM
Subject: Re: InnoDB Questions
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Thank you very much
On Tuesday, November 4, 2003, at 10:25 AM, Harald Fuchs wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Mark Lubratt mark dot lubratt at indeq dot com writes:
I'm considering this option to keep database maintenance to a minimum
(running out of tablespace issues). That way, InnoDB already owns all
the
On Tuesday, November 4, 2003, at 11:25 AM, Harald Fuchs wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Mark Lubratt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm considering using the raw tablespace from InnoDB for a project I'm
working on. I noticed a couple of years ago that there were reports
of tablespace corruption
On Tuesday, November 4, 2003, at 07:58 AM, Leo Huang wrote:
In InnoDB documentation, it suggests to add another file ibdata2 to
get higher performance. Can I do that now, after I have created the
ibdata1 and used it for a while?
How exactly does this increase performance? Will InnoDB store some
2GB limit? On MacOS X?
On almost every OS I've played with lately, the file size limit is massive -
as in far beyond what disc capacity today will allow. Does MacOS X have a 2GB
limit?
Regards,
Chris
On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 04:03 am, Mark Lubratt wrote:
On Tuesday, November 4, 2003, at 10:25
Chris Nolan wrote:
2GB limit? On MacOS X?
On almost every OS I've played with lately, the file size limit is
massive - as in far beyond what disc capacity today will allow. Does
MacOS X have a 2GB limit?
No, OS X has a file size limit of 2 TB (prior to 10.2), 8 TB (10.2.x) or 16
TB (10.3).
I don't know.
I will get some time this week, shutdown MySQL, backup my binary files,
have a go as what Nitin said and see what's going on there.
Leo
Gabriel Ricard wrote:
On Tuesday, November 4, 2003, at 07:58 AM, Leo Huang wrote:
In InnoDB documentation, it suggests to add another file
Hello Nitin,
From the timestamp of the log files, it seems that the first two files
works together while the last one seems just sitting there, doesn't do
anything.
Also, will the log files getting bigger and bigger in the future?? If so
how should I deal with them?
For your last suggestion,
On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 01:42:23AM -0600, Mark Lubratt wrote:
I'm considering using the raw tablespace from InnoDB for a project I'm
working on. I noticed a couple of years ago that there were reports of
tablespace corruption on Linux and these raw tablespaces. Have these
problems been
The last one you're referring to - could it be the error log?
The log files will only grow to a pre-determined limit. These log files
are used to ensure that transactions maintain their durability.
With Oracle, you'd want to be careful. Oracle gets very, very picky
about the stuff underneath
To my knowledge, ext2 does have the limitation but ext3 does not.
Additionally, ReiserFS, JFS and XFS all have disgustingly large file
size limits.
As a side note, apparently NetWare has major file size limitations
(going on Gupta's SQLBase documentation)
Regards,
Chris
Mark Lubratt wrote:
have data more than the size you're specifying, it'll
through error and wont do nothing.
Nitin
- Original Message -
From: Leo Huang [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Nitin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 5:12 AM
Subject: Re: InnoDB Questions
Hello Nitin
yea, he's right, it may be error log file
Nitin
- Original Message -
From: Chris Nolan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Leo Huang [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 5:53 AM
Subject: Re: InnoDB Questions
The last one you're referring to - could
Gabriel,
- Original Message -
From: Gabriel Ricard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.myodbc
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2003 6:46 PM
Subject: InnoDB on Raw partitions in OSX (was Re: MySQL/InnoDB-4.0.16 is
released + sneak peek of 4.1.1)
On Monday, October 27, 2003, at 07:45
Shane,
it is not an InnoDB error message. InnoDB messages are always prefixed with
InnoDB:
The error means that there is an inconsistent row in the db.MYD system table
of MySQL.
Best regards,
Heikki Tuuri
Innobase Oy
http://www.innodb.com
Foreign keys, transactions, and row level locking for
The answer is actually quite simple!
There are a few reasons:
1. Features.
Each table type has something over the other. While InnoDB has transactions,
foreign keys, hot backup capabilities, consistant read and better write
concurrency (for many situations), MyISAM has FULLTEXT indexes, the
In the last episode (Oct 24), Chris Nolan said:
The answer is actually quite simple!
There are a few reasons:
1. Features.
Each table type has something over the other. While InnoDB has transactions,
foreign keys, hot backup capabilities, consistant read and better write
concurrency
I thought I read a message on this list that said you can't use full
text indexes with InnoDB yet. Can anyone confirm that?
- Gabriel
On Thursday, October 23, 2003, at 11:50 AM, Travis Reeder wrote:
I'm sure this has been asked before, but after seeing some benchmarks,
it looks like using
At 02:37 PM 10/23/2003, you wrote:
I thought I read a message on this list that said you can't use full text
indexes with InnoDB yet. Can anyone confirm that?
- Gabriel
On Thursday, October 23, 2003, at 11:50 AM, Travis Reeder wrote:
I'm sure this has been asked before, but after seeing some
, 20 Oct 2003, Heikki Tuuri wrote:
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 22:05:07 +0300
From: Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: InnoDB or OS restriction?
Alex,
in FreeBSD user process memory space is often restricted to 512 MB. You have
to reconfigure or recompile
- a hot backup tool for InnoDB which also backs up
MyISAM tables
- Alkuperäinen viesti -
Lähettäjä: Varshavchick Alexander [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Vastaanottaja: Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Kopio: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Lähetetty: Tuesday, October 21, 2003 2:55 PM
Aihe: Re: InnoDB or OS
- Original Message -
From: Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Varshavchick Alexander [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2003 9:54 AM
Subject: Re: InnoDB or OS restriction?
Alex,
because 512 MB is not an InnoDB or MySQL restriction, it must be an
OS
restriction
Hi again,
as there was not a single answer to my question I can imagine that no one
encountered the same issue, but anyways, can there be any hints? First of
all, are there any means of looking at mysql memory allocation list
grouped by some major parts - for example,
innodb main pool - can be
Hi again,
as there was not a single answer to my question I can imagine that no one
encountered the same issue, but anyways, can there be any hints? First of
all, are there any means of looking at mysql memory allocation list
grouped by some major parts - for example,
innodb main pool - can be
Hi again,
as there was not a single answer to my question I can imagine that no one
encountered the same issue, but anyways, can there be any hints? First of
all, are there any means of looking at mysql memory allocation list
grouped by some major parts - for example,
innodb main pool - can be
Hi again,
as there was not a single answer to my question I can imagine that no one
encountered the same issue, but anyways, can there be any hints? First of
all, are there any means of looking at mysql memory allocation list
grouped by some major parts - for example,
innodb main pool - can be
Hi again,
as there was not a single answer to my question I can imagine that no one
encountered the same issue, but anyways, can there be any hints? First of
all, are there any means of looking at mysql memory allocation list
grouped by some major parts - for example,
innodb main pool - can be
Hi again,
as there was not a single answer to my question I can imagine that no one
encountered the same issue, but anyways, can there be any hints? First of
all, are there any means of looking at mysql memory allocation list
grouped by some major parts - for example,
innodb main pool - can be
I'm very sorry for the duplicated posts, my mail softtware behaved wrong
:(
---
Alex
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- a hot backup tool for InnoDB: now
also backs up your MyISAM tables
- Original Message -
From: alex [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.myodbc
Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 1:30 PM
Subject: Re: InnoDB or OS restriction?
Hi again,
as there was not a single answer to my
On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 01:23:39PM -0400, Don Vu wrote:
Hi guys,
Do both MyISAM tables and INNODB tables support foreign keys in
4.0.15?
No.
--
Jeremy D. Zawodny | Perl, Web, MySQL, Linux Magazine, Yahoo!
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://jeremy.zawodny.com/
MySQL 4.0.15-Yahoo-SMP: up 25
At 12:23 PM 10/9/2003, you wrote:
Hi guys,
Do both MyISAM tables and INNODB tables support foreign keys in 4.0.15?
If so, are the main advantages of using INNODB tables the added features
of transactions, cascading deletes, and it's other more robust features?
Any thoughts on any disadvantages of
Hi Heath,
MySQL cannot use the trans_team query because you're using !=, for which
an index is never used (currently anyway). Do you think that trans_team
is the best index that will find the least rows and produce the fastest
result? If so, you can try using the following, which can be
Matthias,
if you can tolerate losing a few last transactions in a power outage or an
OS crash, you can set
innodb_flush_log_at_trx_commit=2
Have you shut down mysqld and restarted it after populating the tables?
MySQL only updates index cardinality statistics when you run ANALYZE TABLE
or
Heikki,
if you can tolerate losing a few last transactions in a power outage or an
OS crash, you can set
innodb_flush_log_at_trx_commit=2
Does that speed up the thing? I should make some testing.
Have you shut down mysqld and restarted it after populating the tables?
MySQL only updates
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: InnoDB / Linux
Marvin Wright said:
Hi,
I'm in the process of setting up a new database server that will run on
redhat linux.
The machine will be dual processor with 4GB ram and about 16GB disk.
The machine is going to be used purely with InnoDB tables
Marvin Wright said:
Hi,
I'm in the process of setting up a new database server that will run on
redhat linux.
The machine will be dual processor with 4GB ram and about 16GB disk.
The machine is going to be used purely with InnoDB tables and will have
a few very large tables acting as cache
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-09-25 08:58:09 +0300:
From: Roman Neuhauser [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Also, is there a way to *measure* the fragmentation of a table?
If there is, how should the info be interpreted?
Sorry, no. But adding such a feature would be easy: just look at page
numbers, page
Roman,
- Alkuperäinen viesti -
Lähettäjä: Roman Neuhauser [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Vastaanottaja: Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Kopio: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Lähetetty: Friday, September 26, 2003 12:02 PM
Aihe: Re: innodb: storage requirements
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-09-25 08:58:09 +0300
Roman,
- Original Message -
From: Roman Neuhauser [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 11:46 PM
Subject: Re: innodb: storage requirements
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-09-24 17:41:29 +0300:
the row count in SHOW
Yes, i did that.
It's given me something like
si 200/300
so 300/500
It's a lot, doing my system going down. But i think that the problem is that i'm
reserving too much memory for mysql...
Or could exists another reason?
Thx
Alexis
Quoting Per Andreas Buer [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
[EMAIL
801 - 900 of 1574 matches
Mail list logo
