On Thu, Sep 25, 2003 at 03:55:26PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
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...
That's probably true and very
Andy Jefferson wrote:
a simple question ... I have MySQL installed on my Mandrake Linux system,
via the RPM's
MySQL-4.0.11a-5.1mdk
MySQL-common-4.0.11a-5.1mdk
MySQL-client-4.0.11a-5.1mdk
Can anyone tell me how
a) I check if InnoDB is available with this version ? (in the RPM release
Roman,
the table is probably very fragmented. The command
ALTER TABLE pmsystem2.editor_competence_product TYPE=InnoDB;
will defragment it.
Best regards,
Heikki Tuuri
Innobase Oy
http://www.innodb.com
Foreign keys, transactions, and row level locking for MySQL
InnoDB Hot Backup - a hot backup
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-09-23 21:56:55 +0300:
From: Roman Neuhauser [EMAIL PROTECTED]
A simple question regarding storage allocated / reported by MySQL/InnoDB.
If BIGINT takes 8 bytes, and a table has exactly four BIGINT columns,
why is the reported avg. row length 148 bytes?
the table
One thing that stands out is the data types are different sizes.
http://www.mysql.com/doc/en/InnoDB_foreign_key_constraints.html
-Original Message-
From: R.Dobson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 8:42 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: innodb foreign key
whoops, yes, thanks, missed that
Victor Pendleton wrote:
One thing that stands out is the data types are different sizes.
http://www.mysql.com/doc/en/InnoDB_foreign_key_constraints.html
-Original Message-
From: R.Dobson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 8:42
PM
Subject: Re: innodb: storage requirements
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-09-23 21:56:55 +0300:
From: Roman Neuhauser [EMAIL PROTECTED]
A simple question regarding storage allocated / reported by
MySQL/InnoDB.
If BIGINT takes 8 bytes, and a table has exactly four BIGINT columns,
why
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 06:15:19PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I'm working in MySQL with innodb tables, in Linux (Red Hat 9).
I'm creating indexes in a table with 16 million rows (it's a fact table), and it
takes a lot of time (2/3/4 hours), because my system is always swapping
Backup - a hot backup tool for MySQL
- Original Message -
From: Gustavo A. Baratto [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.myodbc
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 5:53 AM
Subject: Re: innodb
Even with brand new log files, I got the messages again:
030923 13:37:10 InnoDB
Hi!
Resending this, because this did not show up at
http://lists.mysql.com/list.php?list=mysql#b
Heikki
- Original Message -
From: Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 10:04 PM
Subject: Re: Innodb disk geometry
Sean,
InnoDB-4.1.1
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-09-24 17:41:29 +0300:
the row count in SHOW TABLE STATUS is only an estimate based on 8
dives into the index tree.
ok.
You had a typical symptom of a fragmented table: space usage much bigger
than you would expect.
that doesn't answer my questions :)
Hmm, as I feared, this problem is so major that no one wants to touch
it. Not that I blame anyone.
-Original Message-
From: Misao [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 22, 2003 6:09 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: InnoDB, Replication, and Data warehouse: Oil, Water, and
On Mon, Sep 22, 2003 at 06:09:22PM -0700, Misao wrote:
What follows is a short story, all true and quite stressful. No database
servers were harmed in the making of this server, but a couple were
threatened with loose rack mount rails.
We are trying to move over to InnoDB, but we have a
Message-
From: Jeremy Zawodny [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 2:11 PM
To: Misao
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: InnoDB, Replication, and Data warehouse: Oil, Water, and
little floating plastic men
On Mon, Sep 22, 2003 at 06:09:22PM -0700, Misao wrote:
*snip
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 03:03:20PM -0700, Misaochankun wrote:
MySQL tells me at startup that it can not allocate more than 512MB of
RAM.
It will fail to start the server if I specify any further.
On what OS?
Can we see the exact error?
Have you checked things like ulimit?
Jeremy
--
Jeremy
cached
-Original Message-
From: Jeremy Zawodny [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 3:28 PM
To: Misaochankun
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: InnoDB, Replication, and Data warehouse: Oil, Water, and
little floating plastic men
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 03:03:20PM
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 03:45:22PM -0700, Misaochankun wrote:
OS: RedHat Enterprise ES 2.1
I talked with RedHat about any OS limitations, and they had me change
the max shared to a suitable number, and still I am stuck at 512MB of
RAM.
It's clearly an OS bug of some kind. I've used well
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, Misaochankun wrote:
Error(using 2.5G RAM out of 4G total):
030924 15:39:55 mysqld started
Warning: Ignoring user change to 'mysql' because the user was set to
'mysql' earlier on the command line
InnoDB: Fatal error: cannot allocate 2684370944 bytes of
InnoDB: memory
MessageNext Message »
From: Harald FuchsDate: September 23 2003 11:45am
Subject: Re: innodb
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Gustavo,
- Original Message -
From: Gustavo A. Baratto [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.myodbc
Sent: Monday, September
Harald,
030923 15:10:14 InnoDB: Error: page 53 log sequence number 6 190415140
InnoDB: is in the future! Current system log sequence number 1
3864837242.
InnoDB: Your database may be corrupt.
what do you think is the correct log sequence number? How much do you have
data?
The pages
I haven't touched the log or the data files before or after I upgraded
mysqld...
Well, now I recreated the log files and so far that error didn't show up
again. let's pray :)
thank you very much
Heikki Tuuri wrote:
Harald,
030923 15:10:14 InnoDB: Error: page 53 log sequence number 6
Even with brand new log files, I got the messages again:
030923 13:37:10 InnoDB: Error: page 2621 log sequence number 0 758479545
InnoDB: is in the future! Current system log sequence number 0 330424282.
InnoDB: Your database may be corrupt.
030923 13:37:10 InnoDB: Error: page 2622 log sequence
Gustavo,
please send me the whole .err log.
I have not seen the error in my own tests. There might be some rare bug in
keeping or reading of log sequence numbers.
Regards,
Heikki
..
Gustavo A. Baratto Date: September 23 2003 3:52 pm
Subject: Re: innodb
I haven't touched
Gustavo,
- Original Message -
From: Gustavo A. Baratto [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.myodbc
Sent: Monday, September 22, 2003 7:33 PM
Subject: innodb
Does anybody know what this error is all about? and how do to get rid of
it... It started when I upgraded 4.0.13 to
]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 6:17 PM
Subject: Re: innodb and fragmentation
Hello Heikki,
Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think a 'null' alter table operation:
ALTER TABLE innodbtable TYPE=INNODB;
does the defragmentation with just one build of the table. And I think
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 6:17 PM
Subject: Re: innodb and fragmentation
Hello Heikki,
Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think a 'null' alter table operation:
ALTER TABLE innodbtable TYPE=INNODB;
does the defragmentation with just
David,
- Original Message -
From: David Griffiths [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.myodbc
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 4:07 AM
Subject: InnoDB Foreign Key Constraint Issue
The following constraint is failing:
ALTER TABLE address_list ADD CONSTRAINT FOREIGN KEY
Hello Heikki,
Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think a 'null' alter table operation:
ALTER TABLE innodbtable TYPE=INNODB;
does the defragmentation with just one build of the table. And I think it
also preserves FOREIGN KEY constraints.
Please test it!
It did the job just fine.
I can't believe I missed that. The insert statement is in the script - not
sure why it wasn't added - not sure why I missed something so obvious.
David.
- Original Message -
From: Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 11:50 PM
Subject: Re
Per Andreas Buer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello Heikki,
Heikki Tuuri writes:
I think a 'null' alter table operation:
ALTER TABLE innodbtable TYPE=INNODB;
does the defragmentation with just one build of the table. And I think it
also
this looks great. will this work with version 4.04 on solaris?
as a side comment, anyone know when 4.1 will get out of the alpha stage?
very much looking forward to upgrading, but only when its relatively
stable.
jeff
Per Andreas Buer wrote:
Hello Heikki,
Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
At 12:40 PM -0600 9/19/03, Jeff Mathis wrote:
this looks great. will this work with version 4.04 on solaris?
as a side comment, anyone know when 4.1 will get out of the alpha stage?
very much looking forward to upgrading, but only when its relatively
stable.
4.0 went beta in 4.0.3, gamma in
Paul DuBois wrote:
At 12:40 PM -0600 9/19/03, Jeff Mathis wrote:
this looks great. will this work with version 4.04 on solaris?
as a side comment, anyone know when 4.1 will get out of the alpha stage?
very much looking forward to upgrading, but only when its relatively
stable.
4.0 went
Irwin,
DROP FOREIGN KEY was implemented after 4.1.0.
Best regards,
Heikki Tuuri
Innobase Oy
http://www.innodb.com
Foreign keys, transactions, and row level locking for MySQL
InnoDB Hot Backup - a hot backup tool for MySQL
Order MySQL technical support from https://order.mysql.com/
-
David,
030916 17:30:21 InnoDB: Error: page 120855 log sequence number 11
2122008369
InnoDB: is in the future! Current system log sequence number 0 100503279.
InnoDB: Your database may be corrupt.
I assume that you have some 18 GB of data in the database? Then the log
sequence number cannot
At 3:25 PM -0700 9/17/03, Hsiu-Hui Tseng wrote:
After specify the variablies for innodb in my.cnf file, I started mysql
server. Why I did not see the creating output? But I can see it in err file.
If there is an error file, that's where you'll see the output.
If you mean you want to see it on the
On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 10:05:02PM -0600, Mike Hillyer wrote:
And will you be making your deadline? ;)
No, he's gonna be a bit late. At least that's what he said a couple
days ago when I sent in an InnoDB bug report.
But have faith. I'm sure it'll be worth the wait. :-)
Jeremy
--
Jeremy D.
Joe,
what does SHOW CREATE TABLE give as the table definition?
What do
EXPLAIN SELECT ... where user_id = 190864 and is_deleted = 0;
and
EXPLAIN SELECT ... where user_id = 190864;
say? If user_id is not the full primary key, then an index scan will happen
and deadlocks of the type below are
user_id is the primary key..
relevant parts of show create table:
| plx_user |CREATE TABLE `plx_user` (
`user_id` int(11) NOT NULL auto_increment,
`is_deleted` int(11) NOT NULL default '0',
`edit_counter` int(11) NOT NULL default '0',
`sendlist_edit_counter` int(11) NOT NULL default '0',
AM
Subject: Re: innodb deadlock issue
user_id is the primary key..
relevant parts of show create table:
| plx_user |CREATE TABLE `plx_user` (
`user_id` int(11) NOT NULL auto_increment,
`is_deleted` int(11) NOT NULL default '0',
`edit_counter` int(11) NOT NULL default '0
This will effectively create a script that creates the schema and moves
data
from one database to the other.
-Original Message-
From: Barry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2003 9:20 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: INNODB data porting problem.
Yes it still is a MySQL DB
Barry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It seems there's a problem while the database is getting dumped coz it
gives an error saying that it was unable to create a particular .frm file.
Can't seem to figure out the reason. Any help would be really welcome. Could
there be a possible problem because
: Victoria Reznichenko [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2003 1:27 PM
Subject: Re: INNODB data porting problem.
Barry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It seems there's a problem while the database is getting dumped coz
it
gives an error saying that it was unable
-
From: Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.myodbc
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2003 2:47 PM
Subject: Re: Innodb crash under Win2000
Rafa,
is this the server you suspected to have some hardware problem?
Please send me the whole .err log for analysis.
Best regards
Yes it still is a MySQL DB but not on the same system albeit another system
on the network.
Regards
Barry
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sean,
I am at this very moment programming them :). The deadline is Sept 15th,
2003.
Best regards,
Heikki
Innobase Oy
http://www.innodb.com
InnoDB - transactions, row level locking, and foreign keys for MySQL
InnoDB Hot Backup - a hot backup tool for MySQL
Order MySQL support from
And will you be making your deadline? ;)
-Original Message-
From: Heikki Tuuri [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2003 10:38 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Innodb multiple tablespaces
Sean,
I am at this very moment programming them :). The deadline
I remember that some weeks ago Heikki announced it is on his todo list but
in the far future unless someone is funding the project.
Thomas Spahni
On Thu, 4 Sep 2003, electroteque wrote:
Hi i was wondering if there was ever going to be a time when Innodb can also
be fulltext indexable ? Being
Steven,
- Original Message -
From: Steven Roussey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.myodbc
Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 5:31 AM
Subject: InnoDB and lots of UPDATES
I have a question about InnoDB and how it would handle updates on the
order of about 3,000-5,000 a
Actually I think it can be done, but I need some help on the hooks on MySQL
and the approval of Heikki...
The matter is that I can be an interesting mental exercise and I think that
it is missing to be a real 'de facto' world wide product.
Any help?
Leo.
- Original Message -
From:
Use transaction:
begin
update ...
update ...
...
update ...
commit;
This way you will only have a syncs to disk at every commit instead of
every
update.
This won't help -- I'm not doing a batch process. Each update is coming
from a different connection...
--steve-
--
MySQL
Could you send us your my.cnf / my.ini ? We might be able to help you
tune your InnoDB config for this setup.
In my experience, InnoDB performance should approach MyISAM in most
environments where the disk is the bottleneck (due to the fact, as said
in the InnoDB table type intro in the docs,
Paul,
if your MySQL server is runnign under Linux then try to play with
innodb_flush_method variable.
I've changed it to O_DSYNC and InnoDB became ~ 9 times faster (Suse 8.2
Linux 2.4.20-4GB i386).
Also check that you didn't allocate too much memory (OS shouldn't swap).
Best regards,
Mikhail.
Thanks for the info.
I'm running MySQL 4.0.14 under Redhat 8.0 / Linux 2.4.20.
Here are the timings I ended up with from playing with innodb_flush_method:
innodb_flush_method=fdatasync (default) 10 minutes 37 seconds
innodb_flush_method=littlesync 10 minutes 22 seconds
fdatasync() or O_DSYNC
because there have been problems with them on many Unix flavors.
**
Mikhail.
- Original Message -
From: Paul Gallier
To: Mikhail Entaltsev ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 4:24 AM
Subject: Re: InnoDB slow?
Thanks
been problems with them on many Unix flavors.
**
Mikhail.
- Original Message -
From: Paul Gallier
To: Mikhail Entaltsev ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 4:24 AM
Subject: Re: InnoDB slow?
Thanks for the info.
I'm running MySQL 4.0.14 under Redhat 8.0
Hi!
- Original Message -
From: Paul Gallier [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.myodbc
Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 9:55 PM
Subject: Re: InnoDB slow?
--060404050304080006000506
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer
PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.myodbc
Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 9:55 PM
Subject: Re: InnoDB slow?
--060404050304080006000506
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I've not a clue - digging around somewhere
Chris,
From: Chris Nolan ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Subject: InnoDB questions for all!
This is the only article in this thread
View: Original Format
Newsgroups: mailing.database.myodbc
Date: 2003-08-28 16:16:53 PST
Hi everyone!
My silly questions for today concern the not-silly-at-all InnoDB table
On Tue, 26 Aug 2003, Heikki Tuuri wrote:
Asif,
now take the old log files from the safe place and put them back! That will
save your data.
The instructions about changing the size of the log files are the following:
http://www.innodb.com/ibman.html#Adding_and_removing
If you want to
Marek,
do not worry:
http://www.innodb.com/ibman.html#InnoDB_history
MySQL/InnoDB-4.0.14, July 21, 2003:
...
* Fixed the checksum calculation of data pages. Previously most OS file
system corruption went unnoticed. Note that if you downgrade from version =
4.0.14 to an earlier version 4.0.14
Asif Iqbal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I already have mysql 4.0.13 running with all InnoDB tables. I am trying to use
my-huge.cnf since I have 4 gig RAM with 4 x 450 Mhz processes
In my MySQL data directory I have two ib_logfile files
-rw-rw 1 mysqlmysql5242880 Aug 26 01:55
On Tue, 26 Aug 2003, Victoria Reznichenko wrote:
Asif Iqbal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I already have mysql 4.0.13 running with all InnoDB tables. I am trying to use
my-huge.cnf since I have 4 gig RAM with 4 x 450 Mhz processes
In my MySQL data directory I have two ib_logfile files
, transactions, and row level locking for MySQL
InnoDB Hot Backup - a hot backup tool for MySQL
Order MySQL technical support from https://order.mysql.com/
- Original Message -
From: Asif Iqbal [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.mysql
Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 9:03 PM
Subject: Re
Hi!
We have only 2 GB of RAM in our SuSE Linux server, and I can allocate 1400
MB to the buffer pool.
Have you checked what
ulimit -a
says for the user running mysqld?
Best regards,
Heikki Tuuri
Innobase Oy
http://www.innodb.com
Foreign keys, transactions, and row level locking for MySQL
I'd have to say that things look fine in that regard.
core file size (blocks) 0
data seg size (kbytes) unlimited
file size (blocks) unlimited
max locked memory (kbytes) unlimited
max memory size (kbytes)unlimited
open files 1024
pipe size (512 bytes)
Asif,
- Original Message -
From: Asif Iqbal [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.mysql
Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2003 10:09 PM
Subject: innodb doc in mysql.com
In mysql.com site on section 7.5.4.1 it says and I qoute
If something goes wrong in an InnoDB database creation,
On Sun, 24 Aug 2003, Heikki Tuuri wrote:
Asif,
- Original Message -
From: Asif Iqbal [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.mysql
Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2003 10:09 PM
Subject: innodb doc in mysql.com
In mysql.com site on section 7.5.4.1 it says and I qoute
If
Asif,
- Original Message -
From: Asif Iqbal [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.mysql
Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2003 8:47 AM
Subject: Re: innodb doc in mysql.com
On Sun, 24 Aug 2003, Heikki Tuuri wrote:
Asif,
- Original Message -
From: Asif Iqbal [EMAIL
Marc,
- Original Message -
From: Marc Slemko [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.mysql
Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2003 7:19 AM
Subject: innodb use outside of explicit transactions
Suppose I have an innodb table in 4.0.14 and do:
LOCK TABLE maggie
INSERT INTO maggie
Jeff,
- Original Message -
From: Jeff Mathis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.mysql
Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2003 12:20 AM
Subject: Re: innodb and fragmentation
does shutting down the database server and restarting it have the same
effect?
no. We were talking about
On Sat, 23 Aug 2003, Heikki Tuuri wrote:
Marc,
- Original Message -
From: Marc Slemko [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.mysql
Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2003 7:19 AM
Subject: innodb use outside of explicit transactions
Suppose I have an innodb table in 4.0.14 and
Per,
I think a 'null' alter table operation:
ALTER TABLE innodbtable TYPE=INNODB;
does the defragmentation with just one build of the table. And I think it
also preserves FOREIGN KEY constraints.
Please test it!
Best regards,
Heikki
Innobase Oy
http://www.innodb.com
InnoDB - transactions,
does shutting down the database server and restarting it have the same
effect?
jeff
Heikki Tuuri wrote:
Per,
I think a 'null' alter table operation:
ALTER TABLE innodbtable TYPE=INNODB;
does the defragmentation with just one build of the table. And I think it
also preserves FOREIGN
I can certainly wait. This system has been working ok for almost a year. I'm
very happy!
I've been doing a review of all aspects of the system, and many of the
maintenance tasks, and internal DB operations have suffered in speed to get
the external parts optimal. But when this fix comes, i'll
Rafal Kedziorski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
we have problems with import our dumped InnoDB tables.
We get this error message:
Can't create table '.\mmcms_test\media_lock.frm' (errno: 150)
My tables which will be referenced by foreign keys will be dumped in the
inncorect order.
if I
Greetings all.
I have a bit of a problem here, a database i'm administering was somehow =
corrupted, and i'm unable to recover it in any way.
what happened? A power outage? You deleted the ib_logfiles? Modified my.cnf?
Hard disk broke?
Thats the weird thing, nothing abnormal happened, i just
On Wed, Aug 13, 2003 at 04:07:24PM -0500, sean peters wrote:
Hi all, i've been weighing the pros and cons of running multiple concurrent
mysqld's on one server, to have better control over what databases are on
what physical disks.
System: 4 processor sun box running solaris with eighteen
R.Dobson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
mmm, i've just tried the example within the mysql docs:
CREATE TABLE parent(id INT NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (id)) TYPE=INNODB;
CREATE TABLE child(id INT, parent_id INT, INDEX par_ind (parent_id),
FOREIGN KEY (parent_id) REFERENCES parent(id)
Hi, yes, I should have included in the first mail. They are:
mysql show table status like 'gene%';
Mads,
- Original Message -
From: Mads Jrgensen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: mailing.database.mysql
Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2003 3:42 PM
Subject: InnoDB crash - recover + bug
Greetings all.
I have a bit of a problem here, a database i'm administering was somehow =
corrupted, and
R.Dobson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi, i'm using Distrib 4.0.1-alpha, for sun-solaris2.8 (sparc)
It's an outdated version and it doesn't support ON DELETE, just parsed. Upgraid MySQL
to the recent version (4.0.14)
--
For technical support contracts, goto https://order.mysql.com/?ref=ensita
Hi, i'm using Distrib 4.0.1-alpha, for sun-solaris2.8 (sparc)
Victoria Reznichenko wrote:
R.Dobson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
mmm, i've just tried the example within the mysql docs:
CREATE TABLE parent(id INT NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (id)) TYPE=INNODB;
CREATE TABLE child(id INT, parent_id INT,
mmm, i've just tried the example within the mysql docs:
CREATE TABLE parent(id INT NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (id)) TYPE=INNODB;
CREATE TABLE child(id INT, parent_id INT, INDEX par_ind (parent_id),
FOREIGN KEY (parent_id) REFERENCES parent(id)
ON DELETE cascade
) TYPE=INNODB;
I'm using mysql-max 4.04. This works.
drop table if exists Parent;
create table Parent (
id int not null auto_increment primary key
) type = InnoDB;
drop table if exists Child;
create table Child (
id int not null auto_increment primary key,
parent_id int not null
) type
we're using a slightly different syntax. add the word constraint in
front of foreign key.
alter table name add constraint foreign key(id) references gene(id) on
delete cascade;
we rely on cascading deletes. This works in our case.
good luck.
R.Dobson wrote:
Hi, yes, I should have included
R.Dobson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi, I have a db where I have converted all the tables innodb. I have 2 tables in
particular called gene and name.
They both have a primary key call id. I want the primary key from name to be deleted
when the corresponding key is deleted from gene.
It
I just looked at your table syntax. you've got two auto_increment pk
columns. do you always have a 1:1 correspondence between the name and
gene tables? would it not be better to have a gene_id column in name,
put an index on it, and then issue:
alter table name add foreign key(gene_id) references
from a running server, which very probably creates corrupt
backups?
Best regards,
Heikki
Innobase Oy
http://www.innodb.com
InnoDB - transactions, foreign keys, and a hot backup tool for MySQL
Order MySQL support from http://www.mysql.com/support/index.html
...
Subject: RE: InnoDB
of the MySQL datadir first, just in
case something goes wrong.
Regards,
Heikki
.
Subject: Re: innodb data file of different size
From: Paul DuBois
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 00:07:49 -0500
At 22:08 -0400 7/29/03, Asif Iqbal wrote:
I just decided to use my.cnf and bumped
On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Paul DuBois wrote:
What I'd do if it were me in your situation:
- Remove the innodb_data_file_path line from your my.cnf file
done
- Restart the server; it should come up normally now
done
- Perform a complete dump of all your databases (just in case)
(use
I noticed that it can't create the pid file. However it has no
problem creating the err file. Would you know why is it so ?
case something goes wrong.
Regards,
Heikki
.
Subject: Re: innodb data file of different size
From: Paul DuBois
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003
At 22:08 -0400 7/29/03, Asif Iqbal wrote:
I just decided to use my.cnf and bumped into this error message
030729 22:04:22 mysqld started
InnoDB: Error: data file /usr/local/mysql/data/ibdata1 is of a different size
InnoDB: 81024 pages (rounded down to MB)
InnoDB: than specified in the .cnf file
At 6:53 +0500 7/27/03, Shahid M. Syed wrote:
Hello,
I'm using InnoDB table types to enforce referential integrity. Is
there any way to use free text search with it ?
If you mean full-text searching with FULLTEXT indexes, no.
Thanks
Shahid M. Syed
Karachi, Pakistan
At 08:53 PM 7/26/2003, you wrote:
Hello,
I'm using InnoDB table types to enforce referential integrity. Is there
any way to use free text search with it ?
Thanks
Shahid M. Syed
Karachi, Pakistan
http://members.tripod.com/shahid_syed
Shahid,
Last I heard Heikki Turri would create full
Estoy tomando el sol
.
q
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Estoy tomando el sol
.
q
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mikhail,
I just tested this. You are probably using the query cache in 4.0. Then
SELECT can return immediately without acquiring any locks.
Of course, it can be discussed if the query cache, too, should respect LOCK
TABLES. I am forwarding this to Sanja.
Thank you,
Heikki
- Original
this to Sanja.
IMHO current behaviour is absolutly correct.
Mikhail.
- Original Message -
From: Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2003 11:43 PM
Subject: Re: InnoDB locking: Different behavior on 3.23.55 and 4.0.13
Mikhail,
I just tested
Alvaro,
- Original Message -
From: Alvaro Avello [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Heikki Tuuri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2003 1:13 AM
Subject: Re: innodb file won't shrink
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
There 's any
901 - 1000 of 1574 matches
Mail list logo
