gt;
>> _
>>
>> From: vegiv...@gmail.com [mailto:vegiv...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Johan De
>> Meersman
>> Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2009 9:56 PM
>> To: Manish Ranjan (Stigasoft)
>> Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
>> Subject: Re: MySQL Performance wi
lto:vegiv...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Johan De
> Meersman
> Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2009 9:56 PM
> To: Manish Ranjan (Stigasoft)
> Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
> Subject: Re: MySQL Performance with large data
>
>
>
> The amount and type of data is less the issue than the
[mailto:vegiv...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Johan De
Meersman
Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2009 9:56 PM
To: Manish Ranjan (Stigasoft)
Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: MySQL Performance with large data
The amount and type of data is less the issue than the amount and type of
queries is :-) The machine
The amount and type of data is less the issue than the amount and type of
queries is :-) The machine you've described should be able to handle quite a
bit of load, though, if well-tuned.
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 4:45 PM, Manish Ranjan (Stigasoft) <
manish.ran...@stigasoft.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>
>
hi all
this is my innodb preference. i need to change anything for increasing the
db performance..
innodb_additional_mem_pool_size --> 1048576
innodb_autoextend_increment --> 8
innodb_buffer_pool_awe_mem_mb --> 0
innodb_buffer_pool_size --> 8388608
innodb_checksums--
http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/whatislvm.html
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 10:13 PM, Moon's Father
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What is LVM?
>
> 2008/5/12 MarisRuskulis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> Hello!
>> I'm wondering about MySQL LVM2 preformance, but cant found any
>> comparisions. I know that there
What is LVM?
2008/5/12 MarisRuskulis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hello!
> I'm wondering about MySQL LVM2 preformance, but cant found any
> comparisions. I know that there is some speed decrease with LVM,
> something about 30%. But how this decrease impacts overal MySQL
> performance?
> Now we are back
Bernd Jagla wrote:
"sar" will give you some basic information about what happens on the
system... (see e.g.: http://linux.die.net/man/1/sar)...
Munin (http://munin.projects.linpro.no/) will generate graphs and stats
over time for system usage (cpu, mem load, disk usage etc) and includes
goo
"sar" will give you some basic information about what happens on the
system... (see e.g.: http://linux.die.net/man/1/sar)...
-B
|-Original Message-
|From: thomas Armstrong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 6:42 AM
|To: mysql@lists.mysql.com
|Subject: MySQL Perform
Hi Daniel,
We were using a software RAID-5 on top of hardware RAID-5 across 3
4-disk volume groups. (1 LUN from each array volume group built the
software RAID-5). So we were able to lose 3 disks in a worst case
scenario.
It seems to me that neither RAID-1 or RAID-5 can lose more than one
disk w
On 12/4/06, Jason J. W. Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Daniel,
Thank you very much for your help and advice. After some examination,
we discovered a couple of things. It looks like our storage array
layout was really bad for the IOPS MySQL was throwing at it, as a
result the InnoDB trans
Hi Daniel,
Thank you very much for your help and advice. After some examination,
we discovered a couple of things. It looks like our storage array
layout was really bad for the IOPS MySQL was throwing at it, as a
result the InnoDB transactions started to back-up under heavy load.
Changing the arr
Jason, in addition to Daniel's suggestions, I'll throw this out there:
I had a somewhat similar problem with a database I used to own, where
a handful of very hard-hit tables would become progressively slower
over time, despite the fact that (due to daily archiving and purging)
they were not grow
On 11/27/06, Jason J. W. Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
We're running MySQL 5.0.27 under Solaris 10 on both Opteron and
UltraSparc T1 machines. The performance on both boxes starts out great
when the process is fresh, however over the course of a week of heavy
use the performance degrad
inson
-Original Message-
From: Dan Buettner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 6:35 AM
To: Robinson, Eric
Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: MySQL Performance Question
One reason you might be seeing a higher number of writes than reads is
if MySQL is able to answer queries fro
---Original Message-
From: Atle Veka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2006 12:14 PM
To: Robinson, Eric
Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: MySQL Performance Question
So, you're looking at 150-300 databases and ~31-62k tables based on your
numbers? MySQL should be able to
ersions of the application.)
--Eric
-Original Message-
From: Atle Veka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2006 12:14 PM
To: Robinson, Eric
Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: MySQL Performance Question
So, you're looking at 150-300 databases and ~31-62k table
So, you're looking at 150-300 databases and ~31-62k tables based on your
numbers? MySQL should be able to handle that, as should your OS, but the
most important part IMO is how your clients will be using their
data(bases). What sort of queries, how many, etc. Will it be possible for
one client to h
essage-
> From: Dan Trainor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 1:41 AM
> To: Moritz Möller; mysql@lists.mysql.com
> Subject: Re: mysql performance
>
> Moritz Möller wrote:
>> Hi list,
>>
>> we're running some large high-traffic mysql
ler; mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: mysql performance
Moritz Möller wrote:
Hi list,
we're running some large high-traffic mysql servers, and are currently
reaching the limit of our machines.
We're using mysql 4.1 / innodb on debian, ibdata is about 35GB. Hardware
is
quad xeon d
e database on application level (use
> server userID%numServers), which would be a [insert favourite non-swear-word
> here] lot of work ;)
>
> Moritz
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Dan Trainor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 1:41 AM
> To: Mor
com
Subject: Re: mysql performance
Moritz Möller wrote:
Hi list,
we're running some large high-traffic mysql servers, and are currently
reaching the limit of our machines.
We're using mysql 4.1 / innodb on debian, ibdata is about 35GB. Hardware
is
quad xeon dualcore, 8 GB RA
on application level (use
server userID%numServers), which would be a [insert favourite non-swear-word
here] lot of work ;)
Moritz
-Original Message-
From: Dan Trainor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 1:41 AM
To: Moritz Möller; mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: my
Moritz Möller wrote:
Hi list,
we're running some large high-traffic mysql servers, and are currently
reaching the limit of our machines.
We're using mysql 4.1 / innodb on debian, ibdata is about 35GB. Hardware is
quad xeon dualcore, 8 GB RAM. Disk-io is nearly zero, limiting factor is
CPU.
The
Hi,
The insert queries are run from the localhost on both the machines.
-Abdul
On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 10:28 -0700, Atle Veka wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Apr 2006, Mohammed Abdul Azeem wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have 2 mysql servers with version 5.0.15-standard-log running on
> > redhat es4 installed on
Hi,
The Server2 is not a slave. Seperate inserts were done on two different
mysql servers.
Thanks,
Abdul.
On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 12:01 -0400, Kishore Jalleda wrote:
>
>
> On 4/28/06, Mohammed Abdul Azeem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have 2 mysql servers with
On Fri, 28 Apr 2006, Mohammed Abdul Azeem wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have 2 mysql servers with version 5.0.15-standard-log running on
> redhat es4 installed on 2 different geographic locations. The default
> storage engine used is innodb on both the servers. I run an insert query
> on both the servers tha
On 4/28/06, Mohammed Abdul Azeem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I have 2 mysql servers with version 5.0.15-standard-log running on
redhat es4 installed on 2 different geographic locations. The default
storage engine used is innodb on both the servers. I run an insert query
on both the servers t
Hi,
I would like to make one correction. The server one has 2 IDE hard disks
and not SATA hard disks.
Thanks,
Abdul.
On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 16:33 +0530, Mohammed Abdul Azeem wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The following is the hard disk specs for both the servers:
>
> server one: ( whose performance is good )
Hi,
The following is the hard disk specs for both the servers:
server one: ( whose performance is good )
---
class: HD
bus: IDE
detached: 0
device: hda
driver: ignore
desc: "ST3200822A"
physical: 16383/16/63
logical: 24321/255/63
-
class: HD
bus: IDE
detached: 0
device: hdb
driver: ignor
> Hi,
>
> I have 2 mysql servers with version 5.0.15-standard-log running on
> redhat es4 installed on 2 different geographic locations. The default
> storage engine used is innodb on both the servers. I run an insert query
> on both the servers that inserts 25,00,000 records. first server takes
>
As others have suggested , turn your slow query log on in my.cnf , and set
your long-query_time, and you can view your slow queries in the *.log file
in your data dir, and then try to optimize them, you could also try mytop (
http://jeremy.zawodny.com/mysql/mytop/) , and check your queries in real
Is tat query is the problem ?
Then turn on your slow queies and try optimizing those slow queries ?
Post your queries and table description for further help :)
--Praj
On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 12:33:20 -0500
"Jacob, Raymond A Jr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> After a 23days of running mysql, I
Jacob, Raymond A Jr wrote:
After a 23days of running mysql, I have a 3GB database. When I use an
application
called base(v.1.2.2) a web based intrusion detection analysis console, the
mysqld utilization
shoots up to over 90% and stays there until the application times out or is
terminated.
Q
If you suddenly are spiking in unauthenticated connections, you may
be the target of a network attack. This could be just a random probe,
you may be a random target or someone may be targeting you. Although
if someone were specifically targeting you, you would probably be down.
I would chec
"my.cnf" add this: "skip-name-resolve" under "[mysqld]"
On 8/29/05, Callum McGillivray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm pretty new to the list, so please be kind :)
>
> I'm having serious problems with our core mysql server.
>
> We are running a Dell Poweredge 2850 with dual Xeon 3
Vasiliy Boulytchev wrote:
Brent,
Would you be so kind to throw out some links to "tweaking" mysql to run
to its full performance. I am googling right now for the answeres. Is
there books you would recommend?
THANKS
High Performance Mysql (oreilly)
MySQL enterprise solution
No books to recommend, although there was a review of one on
slashdot.org this morning, but you can start with the manual here:
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/mysql/en/Server_parameters.html
Other articles you may find helpful:
http://www.f3n.de/doku/mysql/manual_10.html
http://www.onlamp.com/pub/a/onl
Brent,
Would you be so kind to throw out some links to "tweaking" mysql to run
to its full performance. I am googling right now for the answeres. Is
there books you would recommend?
THANKS
On Tue, 2004-11-23 at 14:29 -0500, Brent Baisley wrote:
> I could see how the Pen
I could see how the Pentium 4 may be faster for certain things. In some
cases, older Pentiums with larger caches (i.e. 2MB) would outperform a
Pentium 4. Rumor has it that MySQL loves level 2 cache, but don't tell
PHP. But in this case, the Pentium 4 and Xeon I'm pretty sure both have
512K leve
I do not believe that your problem is based on your hardware but ...
Inserting data requires to reorganize your indexes. Please try to drop
them (only for testing ;-) )
Hagen
Carlos Augusto wrote:
Well that´s me again with a new problem. I am runnig another database
with 7gb of data and this db
Carlos,
Give us more details about our system:
What are the table types you´re using?
What are the configs in your my.cnf file?
Ronan
- Original Message -
From: "Carlos Augusto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2004 3:41 PM
Subject: Mysql Performan
Hello Chris,
I'm not familiar with super-smack, but it's compared to Apaches 'ab' which
IMO is great for getting quick performance numbers but should in no way be
trusted compared to a real world production environment. We run probably
about 50+ dedicated mysql servers on various FreeBSD 4.X rele
On Sat, May 22, 2004 at 11:25:54PM -0500, mos wrote:
> >
> >Once I wiped this and tried Linux (both gentoo, with their
> >patched-to-the-hilt 2.6.5 kernel, and Debian, with a stock 2.6.6 which
> >had just been released by the time I installed) this figure jumped to
> >35,000 queries per second.
>
mos wrote:
At 04:42 PM 5/21/2004, you wrote:
Forenote: I have no wish to start an OS debate.
Hello,
Once I wiped this and tried Linux (both gentoo, with their
patched-to-the-hilt 2.6.5 kernel, and Debian, with a stock 2.6.6 which
had just been released by the time I installed) this figure jumped to
At 04:42 PM 5/21/2004, you wrote:
Forenote: I have no wish to start an OS debate.
Hello,
Once I wiped this and tried Linux (both gentoo, with their
patched-to-the-hilt 2.6.5 kernel, and Debian, with a stock 2.6.6 which
had just been released by the time I installed) this figure jumped to
35,000 que
On Fri, May 21, 2004 at 05:18:09PM -0600, Sasha Pachev wrote:
>
> It looks like FreeBSD was using only one CPU from your numbers. Try the
> test with only 1 thread and a lot of iterations to avoid the influence of
> overhead. I know very little about FreeBSD, but one thing I would check is
> if
Chris Elsworth wrote:
Forenote: I have no wish to start an OS debate.
Hello,
I'm in the fortunate position of having a dual 2.8GHz Xeon with 4G of
ram and 4 10k SCSI disks (configured in RAID-10) to deploy as a new
MySQL server.
Since I'm a numbers freak, I've been running super-smack on it for the
>From the sounds of it, it's not clear if the database is the issue. Of the
1000 records, did the first 100 get in, then no other ones. Or were the
missed-messages intermittent - some were missing in the middle?
You need to figure out if the MySQL connections are throwing an exception.
One thing
Hi!
We are a hardware store(similiar to usa's home depot) here in venezuela.
We have 14 stores that moves a very heavy load of traffic.
Many of our retails runs in a home brew POS that uses mysql. Then sales
are uploaded to a bigger in-store server and then move to the central
office. The prices,
Hi David,
Thanks for you prompt reply. I'll try to answer
your questions to the best I can currently. Please
see my replies below.
David Griffiths wrote:
So your application tracks incoming HTTP-GETS.
When you say that it's not able to "capture" all 1000 entries, what do you
mean? Does an
So your application tracks incoming HTTP-GETS.
When you say that it's not able to "capture" all 1000 entries, what do you
mean? Does an exception get thrown? Do some of the HTTP-GETs just not show
in the database?
You need to provide alot more information:
Do all the HTTP-GETs happen on the same
.21 37.29
> 10:30:00 HK all 35.91 0.00 16.64 47.45
> 10:40:00 HK all 46.26 0.00 22.03 31.72
> 10:50:00 HK all 43.28 0.00 19.37 37.35
> 11:00:00 HK all 35.22 0.00 16.42 48.36
> 11:10:00 HK
piler :-)) -- except stat() or whatever to check
the mtime.
Matt
- Original Message -
From: "mos"
Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2003 1:44 PM
Subject: Re: Mysql Performance Question
> At 12:32 PM 10/21/2003, you wrote:
> >Thanks a lot guys.
> >
> >Haydies:
&g
At 12:32 PM 10/21/2003, you wrote:
Thanks a lot guys.
Haydies:
>Just out of wondering, are you using PHP and if so do you use
mysql_pconnect
>rather then mysql_connect because that would really speed things up.
I tired pconnect before but it didn't help but using up all the available
memory.
ECTED]>
To: "Rainer Sip" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2003 3:11 AM
Subject: Re: Mysql Performance Question
> You need to figure out what's slowing down your application. It could be
> expensive queries which in turn could be c
Hi Rainer,
You might get more improvement by optimizing your application and
queries than by tuning hardware or MySQL. :-)
About switching to InnoDB, are you doing lots of writes that are causing
locked tables? e.g. What's the ratio of Table_locks_immediate to
Table_locks_waited in SHOW STATUS? I
You need to figure out what's slowing down your application. It could be
expensive queries which in turn could be caused by missing indexes. It could
be that the machine is too slow or the configuration of MySQL is
sub-optimal.
In this case, the machine looks fine.
I can't comment on queries or i
Rainer Sip wrote:
>
> I'm running a community site (Xoops) on Mysql 4.0.14.
>
> I found that the speed of my site is slow during peak hours, when there are 450
> concurrent uers hanging on the site. Mytop showed that the queries per second maxed
> at 500. I believe this could be higher, provide
Thanks a lot guys.
Haydies:
>Just out of wondering, are you using PHP and if so do you use
mysql_pconnect
>rather then mysql_connect because that would really speed things up.
I tired pconnect before but it didn't help but using up all the available
memory. It speeds up things until the disk
On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 00:48:29 +0800, Rainer Sip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In the mid run I'm planning to mirgrate to innodb for higher concurrency (I'm currently using myisam). However, I'm seeking suggestions in fine tuning the parameters.
I know you want to tune the parameters, but if you haven
On Tuesday, October 21, 2003, at 12:48 PM, Rainer Sip wrote:
I'm running a community site (Xoops) on Mysql 4.0.14.
I found that the speed of my site is slow during peak hours, when
there are 450 concurrent uers hanging on the site. Mytop showed that
the queries per second maxed at 500. I belie
"Keith C. Ivey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I'm running a server with a Pentium 133 w/32meg ram, 512 pipeline
>> burst, with a wd 512MB HD and I want to store George Bush in our MySQL
>> database.
>>
>> As far as table definitions are concerned, should I use a BLOB or
>> should I store him on
On 9 Jul 2003 at 23:14, Andrew Braithwaite wrote:
> I'm running a server with a Pentium 133 w/32meg ram, 512 pipeline
> burst, with a wd 512MB HD and I want to store George Bush in our MySQL
> database.
>
> As far as table definitions are concerned, should I use a BLOB or
> should I store him o
Here you go -
http://www.mysql.com/information/benchmarks.html
---
I'm just now starting to play with MySQL. I had a client ask me how it
performance compared to Oracle, DB2, and MS SQL server. Does anyone know of
any benchmarks of other specs that can compare performance?
-
Hi again. :-)
On Thu 2002-09-05 at 14:18:10 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
> 3) I'm somewhat at a loss for this one and perhaps the answer is more
> obvious than not. I have 257 total tables from my main DB and mysql. I
> figured this by a "ls -al var/ | grep -c MYD". How can I possibly
First of all, I forgive the rather lengthy post.
Thanks for the repl(y|ies) Benjamin. Decreasing the key_buffer should
be my first step. Back to the questions:
3) I'm somewhat at a loss for this one and perhaps the answer is more
obvious than not. I have 257 total tables from my main DB and
Benjamin Pflugmann wrote:
>OTOH, if this is a MySQL-only machine, 3GB are plenty and 100MB more
>or less used do not really matter (regarding free memory), so I would
>simply set it to use about 400MB are forget about it.
>
>
Remember to actually benchmark your differences too if possible (with
Hi.
On Thu 2002-09-05 at 09:09:07 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> For clarity sake, assume the following:
>
> Red Hat Linux 7.1
> 2.4.8 kernel
> MySQL 3.23.42
> MyISAM databases
> 3GB RAM
> P3/700 x 4
> 15GB database spanned across ~200 tables
>
> Key_reads / Key_read_request = 0.00059875
1 SBus 25 3 SUNW,fas/sd (block)
> >
> > 1 SBus 2513 SUNW,socal/sf (scsi-3)
> > 501-3060
> >
> >No failures found in System
> >===
> >
> >No System Faults found
> >==
> &
r the help,
Supriya.
----- Original Message -
From: "Mark Matthews" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Supriya Shiyekar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 7:02 AM
Subject: Re: MySql performance problem
> - Or
- Original Message -
From: "Supriya Shiyekar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 10:59 PM
Subject: MySql performance problem
>
> Hi,
>
> We are having strange performance problem with mysql on Solaris.Our
> application makes JDBC calls to mys
Hi,
Don't give up.Try againso ... what's your problem?
More details about your problem are welcome.
Regards,
Gelu
_
G.NET SOFTWARE COMPANY
Permanent e-mail address : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTE
[snip]
I am having performance problems with my MySQL installation - what would be
an appropriate channel for requesting help to such a problem?
[/snip]
Repost your original concern and I will see if I can help.
Jay
-
Before
t;[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Jay Blanchard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 5:09 PM
Subject: Re: MySQL Performance on Dual Processor machine
> Just becareful not to use too much memory unless you raise the DMAX
> and such values (see
TED]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 3:34 PM
Subject: RE: MySQL Performance on Dual Processor machine
> [snip]
> I would suspect other things first such as the my.cnf configuration
> (show variables) or has the kernel been optimised on the old box.
> Did you check kernel configurati
times the indexes don't
copy.
-Original Message-
From: Jay Blanchard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 3:34 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: MySQL Performance on Dual Processor machine
[snip]
I would suspect other things first such as the my.cnf configura
[snip]
I would suspect other things first such as the my.cnf configuration
(show variables) or has the kernel been optimised on the old box.
Did you check kernel configurations and disk subsystems? Also the
default process size on FreeBSD is 256Meg, so more memory won't help
much unless you use
Hi,
I don't have any experience with FreeBSD; however, I use MySQL on SMP
servers with Linux.
1. due to MySQL architecture (1 thread per connection) you should not
expect any performance
inprovement on a dual processor for a SINGLE SQL query compared to an
uniprocessor machine.
This is what
Hi Jay,
There are other things that could be affecting the performance
besides mysql. If both machines are idle. The long query should run
about the same on the new machine. One thread will only run on one
processor no matter how you compile mysql. For compiling MySQK on
FreeBSD use the por
Good Morning Alexander!
Looks like you have tuned your system pretty well.
> They are slightly less than 25716, is there any way to check if this
upper
> limit becoming reached sometimes?
sysctl kern.openfiles will tell you how many are open now but there is
no way to know if the upper limit i
r a list of changes and fixes since 4.0.1 at
> http://www.mysql.com/doc/N/e/News-4.0.2.html
>
> Good Luck,
> Ken
> - Original Message -
> From: "Varshavchick Alexander" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Ken Menzel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: &quo
ginal Message -
From: "Varshavchick Alexander" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Ken Menzel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Simon Green" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 11:31 AM
Subject: Re: Mysql performance question
&
From: Ken Menzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Varshavchick Alexander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Simon Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Mysql performance question
>
> Hi Simon,
>A couple of things, unless you have compiled WITH_LI
> Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 13:22:04 -0000
> > From: Simon Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: 'Varshavchick Alexander' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: RE: Mysql performance question
> >
> > What disk drive have you got?
> &g
Varshavchick, Metrocom Joint Stock Company
Phone: (812)118-3322, 118-3115(fax)
On Tue, 19 Feb 2002, Simon Green wrote:
> Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 13:22:04 -
> From: Simon Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 'Varshavchick Alexander' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL
What disk drive have you got?
We have found that this can help.
Simon
-Original Message-
From: Varshavchick Alexander [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 19 February 2002 13:14
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Mysql performance question
Hi people,
May be anybody can advice from the persona
Ales
It would be a good start to look at the OS on its own.
Latest Linux versions are fast.
Solaris is not the fastest but is rock solid.
Win...well is windows.
So this info will reflect on what you run.
But how fast a system do you need? MySQL is very fast and so even on a low
spec system you
On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 08:02:49AM +0100, Ronan Minogue wrote:
> Jeremy,
>
> Firstly thank you for the reply.
>
> On the MySql web site there are benchmark response times provided
> for the execution of queries on NT 4. e.g. reading 2,000,000 rows
> by index requiring 367 seconds.
>
> Are you
-
From: Jeremy Zawodny [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 21 October 2001 23:52
To: Ronan Minogue
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: MySQL Performance Question
On Sun, Oct 21, 2001 at 08:41:45PM +0100, Ronan Minogue wrote:
> Dear Sir/Madam.
>
> I have written a Management Information Sy
On Sun, Oct 21, 2001 at 08:41:45PM +0100, Ronan Minogue wrote:
> Dear Sir/Madam.
>
> I have written a Management Information System that has a MySQL db
> running on a Linux server. There is quite a small number of tables.
> However these tables are growing quickly and the queries executed
> will
No problem, MYSQL is great and I know far less about it than I do
Oracle.
Dave
On Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 06:08:07PM +0200, Tonu Samuel wrote:
> On Fri, 2001-10-05 at 17:06, David Turner wrote:
> > >
> > > BTW, this is unique in MySQL - you can have tables mixed to be
> > > transactional (InnoDB) a
On Fri, 2001-10-05 at 17:06, David Turner wrote:
> >
> > BTW, this is unique in MySQL - you can have tables mixed to be
> > transactional (InnoDB) and nontransactional (MyISAM) and use them mixed
> > in same query. All other SQL-s (as much I know) have transactions on
>
> Oracle's Global Tempora
>
> BTW, this is unique in MySQL - you can have tables mixed to be
> transactional (InnoDB) and nontransactional (MyISAM) and use them mixed
> in same query. All other SQL-s (as much I know) have transactions on
Oracle's Global Temporary Tables don't write to redo or rollback, and
on normal tab
On Fri, 2001-10-05 at 12:13, Carl Troein wrote:
> It seems to be pretty popular to have a large number of databases,
> but I guess it's mostly due to having a large number of users.
> In pthe project I'm working on now we have 3 databases, 2 of which
> are mysql and test. However, some of our tab
Tonu Samuel writes:
> > I want to setup a machine with 3000 databases, each database will have
> > 41 tables.
> This should be no problem for MySQL. Everything is depending how to you
> use MySQL.
It seems to be pretty popular to have a large number of databases,
but I guess it's mostly du
On Fri, 2001-10-05 at 09:52, José León Serna wrote:
> Hello:
> I want to setup a machine with 3000 databases, each database will have
> 41 tables. Does MySQL support this configuration? What machine do you think
> will support this configuration? The purpose is to create a website with
> PHP+M
On Thu, Sep 06, 2001 at 05:26:53PM +0200, Henning Schroeder wrote:
> >Find all the queries that interact with this table. EXPLAIN them. Time them.
>
> *all* of them? there are lots.
Well, perhaps not initially but you may want to have EXPLAINed a majority
of the queries that are issued against
The queries were...
> > select * from cookies left join users on cookies.uid=users.uid left join
> > sessions on users.uid=sessions.uid where
> > cookies.cookie="e3bd03382561eb3619b66fbea2af217d";
> >
> > select * from cookies left join users on cookies.uid=users.uid left join
> > extended on
Henning Schroeder wrote:
> At 17:52 06.09.01, you wrote:
>
> >It is copying ALL of the results into the temp table. If you can (e.g.
> >you know you will
> >never want more than N records), add a LIMIT 0,N to the end of the SELECT
> >so that when you
> >have an old timestamp it will not hang the
1 - 100 of 125 matches
Mail list logo
