Re: mysql 4.1 server optimization

If you have the slow query log enabled, grab some slow queries from there and run EXPLAIN. From there, you can figure out how the optimizer is executing the query. I found that approach to be very useful in optimizing individual queries and making indexing decisions. I can't quite make out w

Re: mysql 4.1 server optimization

Dimitar, Just looking over the server status, it looks like you have a high rate of temp table to disk. Created_tmp_disk_tables 5454 Created_tmp_files 1010 Created_tmp_tables 3 I would try increasing the max_heap_table_size. Increasing the tmp_table_size alone wouldn't be enoug

回复： Re: 回复： Re: 回 复： Re: MySQL 4.1 and PHP 4.4

--- Gleb Paharenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>写道: > Hello. > > I usually put this statement after mysql_connect(). > It is difficult for me to say is your site is Ok, > because my knowledge is limited only to English, > Russian, Ukrainian and > elementary German. Check that you can get the > correct dat

回复： Re: 回复： Re: MySQL 4.1 and PHP 4.4

--- Gleb Paharenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>写道: > > You can change the character_set_xxx variables using > SQL > queries. I usually put 'SET NAMES' at the beginning > of my > scripts. > Must i add mysql_query("SET NAMES 'utf8'") before every occurance of real mysql_query()? I have added mysql_query

Re: 回复： Re: MySQL 4.1 and PHP 4.4

Hello. > collation. PHP 4.4 doesn't provide API to work with > Connection Character Sets and Collations. PHP 5 adds You can change the character_set_xxx variables using SQL queries. I usually put 'SET NAMES' at the beginning of my scripts. 立 周 wrote: > --- Gleb Paharenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

回复： Re: MySQL 4.1 and PHP 4.4

--- Gleb Paharenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>写道: > Hello. > > From my experience PHP 4.4 works fine with MySQL > 4.1. > What troubles are you getting while restoring utf8 > database > to the server? Please, could you explain more in > detail all steps > of the restoring process. Include information abo

Re: MySQL 4.1 and PHP 4.4

Hello. >From my experience PHP 4.4 works fine with MySQL 4.1. What troubles are you getting while restoring utf8 database to the server? Please, could you explain more in detail all steps of the restoring process. Include information about database character set as well. 立 周 wrote: > Dear list s

Re: Mysql 4.1 full table (nearly) - best practice to alter?

sheeri kritzer wrote: On 11/18/05, Michael Stassen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Sheeri, I think you've missed the point. The 4Gb limit is in mysql, not the filesystem. Mysql effectively doesn't limit tablesize, but the *default* pointer size limits you to a max of about 4Gb in a MyISAM table.

Re: Mysql 4.1 full table (nearly) - best practice to alter?

On 11/18/05, Michael Stassen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sheeri, > > I think you've missed the point. The 4Gb limit is in mysql, not the > filesystem. > Mysql effectively doesn't limit tablesize, but the *default* pointer size > limits you to a max of about 4Gb in a MyISAM table. To have a la

Re: Mysql 4.1 full table (nearly) - best practice to alter?

sheeri kritzer wrote: Simon, If your tables are too big, you want to archive/delete some information. I certainly cannot guide you on what to delete. What you describe below isn't going to do anything. From the documentation (http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/create-table.html): ---

Re: Mysql 4.1 full table (nearly) - best practice to alter?

Hi, 0. stop the web server or avoid hitting the db ! > 1). Backup everything! :) the mysqldump should suffice. > 2). do the alter The alter does already a create table with new data and then exchance table. You need 2x the storage space though. 3. do the opposite of 0. -- Pooly Webzine Rock

Re: Mysql 4.1 full table (nearly) - best practice to alter?

Simon, If your tables are too big, you want to archive/delete some information. I certainly cannot guide you on what to delete. What you describe below isn't going to do anything. From the documentation (http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/create-table.html): ---

Re: MySQL 4.1 timezone

Le jeudi 27 octobre 2005 à 01:12 +0300, Gleb Paharenko a écrit : > Hello. > > > > In mysql-5.0.15 it works. Put, say, default_time_zone='+10:00' in > > [mysqld] section of your file. This option works too under MySQL 4.1.11: [mysqld] default_time_zone=UTC mysql> SELECT @@global.time_zone, @@

Re: MySQL 4.1 timezone

Hello. In mysql-5.0.15 it works. Put, say, default_time_zone='+10:00' in [mysqld] section of your file. Raphaël 'SurcouF' Bordet wrote: > Hi, > > I want to set up a different timezone that my operating system for MySQL > upper to 4.1. According to this article[1], timezone system var

RE: MySQL 4.1 on 64bit Fedora Core 3

> The following might also be helpful (not all info in there is > Opteron-specific): > http://hashmysql.org/index.php?title=Opteron_HOWTO Argh - should have read my own entry on that wiki page. If you use PHP v4.3 (as installed with FC3) then it requires the MySQL v3.23 interface libraries (aka l

RE: MySQL 4.1 on 64bit Fedora Core 3

> The OS installed is the 64bit version of FC3. > > I have upgraded MySQL from 3.23 to 4.1 and I have installed the shared > library. (MySQL-shared-4.1.14-0.glibc23.x86_64.rpm) > > The problem is that PHP complains that it cannot find > 'libmysqlclient.so.10'. I think you need the shared-compat l

Re: MySQL 4.1 full throttled?

The ideal setup is based on your data and access patterns to that data. Read these two pages to get a start: http://dev.mysql.com/doc/mysql/en/server-parameters.html http://dev.mysql.com/doc/mysql/en/server-system-variables.html By understanding what each variable does, you'll know which one to

Re: MySQL 4.1 full throttled?

Hello, I did a complete new install on another machine but this time I selected the dedicated server option during the first setup, reran the same process and its going about 3 times faster then it did before.. so it looks like I am on the right track! the current sizes I have for the followin

Re: MySQL 4.1 full throttled?

MySQL is not limited in anyway if you don't have a license. The default install is not optimal for the hardware you are running it on. The default parameters are set pretty low so as not to monopolize your system. If you are doing a big insert, you should adjust the appropriate buffers (key

Re: MySQL 4.1 full throttled?

Nope, it's not throttled by default but a bad set of INI settings can ruin your day. I also run MySQL locally on a laptop (with worse hardware figures than yours) and I have achieved Access to MySQL conversion speeds of 2000-8000 records per second (depending on the physical size of the record

Re: MySQL 4.1 full throttled?

> > Hi Shawn, > I am using the MySQL ODBC driver to connect from our application to the > MySQL database, > The actual server setting are default stright from the origional install, > I am running all this from my laptop localy (both MySQL and MS SQL tests), > P4 2.8GHZ, and 512mb ram. > its

Re: MySQL 4.1 full throttled?

Andrew stolarz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 08/18/2005 03:29:39 PM: > Hi folks, > I just downloaded MySQL 4.1 to see if its a go ahead with our application, > I am doing a tranfser from our current datafile to MySQL, its taking about > 45 min to do this process.. > when I do the same process

Re: Mysql 4.1. my-large.cnf or my-medium.cnf? Dual Opteron web server 2gb memory

Privet! What hardware does your server have? What version of MySQL have you tested? If key_buffer_size isn't enough for indexes of smacker's table then performance could go bad (in my my-medium.cnf it is only 16M). Thread cache gives performance hint for my-large.cnf. Add SQL_NO_CACHE to q

Re: MySQL 4.1 Win 2003 server install problem

hi, if u'r uninstalled the mysql and try to reinstalling means, try the following. 1.Delete all the corresponding files that are created by the prev installation after the uninstallation. 2.Install the MySQL again. Now it'll work. This is due to some configuration prob between the prev and new

Re: Mysql 4.1 and the LIMIT sql statement

On Nov 17, 2004, Matt Babineau & Dan Nelson discussed: > > Has anyone run into problems with this sql syntax? > > > > LIMIT -1 > > > > I've used this extensively in my code to get back all records rather then > > specifing a limit. I've done this programmatically with PHP, so all my > > queries

Re: mysql 4.1.x and openbsd: client library problem

Hello. It is a bug: http://bugs.mysql.com/bug.php?id=6521 "H. Steuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > hello guys, > > after compiling and installing mysql 4.1.9 from sources, the database server > seems to work fine, but everything from client/ seems to somehow "hardcode" > the client l

RE: MySQL-4.1 and PHP

Nope no issues. > -Original Message- > From: Daniel Kasak [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2005 6:51 PM > To: mysql@lists.mysql.com > Subject: MySQL-4.1 and PHP > > Hi all. > > Does anyone know if there are any issues with PHP-4.1 and MySQL-4.1? > I assume I'll hav

Re: MySQL 4.1 and PHP5 with old client

In the last episode (Nov 26), Andre Matos said: > I have installed MySQL 4.1.7-nt + Apache 2 + PHP 5.0.2 + PHPMyAdmin > 2.6.0-pl1 on my Windows XP Pro SP2. I am trying to solve the problem with > MySQL PHP Old Clients using OLD_PASSWORD instead of just PASSWORD. > > How can I set on "my.ini" to st

Re: MySQL 4.1 and PHP5 with old client

At 11:21 -0500 11/26/04, Andre Matos wrote: Hi, I have installed MySQL 4.1.7-nt + Apache 2 + PHP 5.0.2 + PHPMyAdmin 2.6.0-pl1 on my Windows XP Pro SP2. I am trying to solve the problem with MySQL PHP Old Clients using OLD_PASSWORD instead of just PASSWORD. How can I set on "my.ini" to start MySQL u

Re: Mysql 4.1 and the LIMIT sql statement

I suppose they fixed it. Relying on 'undocumented features' is a bad habbit. Update your code to exclude the LIMIT clause if you do not wish to use it. Its the best thing ou can do. Mark Papadakis On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 12:21:31 -0800, Matt Babineau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi all- > > Has

Re: Mysql 4.1 and the LIMIT sql statement

In the last episode (Nov 17), Matt Babineau said: > Has anyone run into problems with this sql syntax? > > LIMIT -1 > > I've used this extensively in my code to get back all records rather then > specifing a limit. I've done this programmatically with PHP, so all my > queries have a limit even if

Re: mysql 4.1 + debian

Hi. See: http://dev.mysql.com/doc/mysql/en/BDB_portability.html What OS do you use? What is the output of the following statement: SHOW VARIABLES LIKE 'have_bdb'; If you don't need bdb try to start MySQL with skip-bdb in /etc/my.cnf in section [mysqld] And you may use official

Re: mysql 4.1 + debian

Ron Gilbert wrote: I got 4.1 from the debian site, 4.1 that is on the mysql site is a RPM and I've had no luck installing rpm's on debian, even using alien. No, it's *available* as an RPM, but the *first* thing on the MySQL download page is a binary for Linux packaged as a tar file. Why not just u

Re: mysql 4.1 + debian

No, I did not see the reply, sorry, I just saw the original message. I got 4.1 from the debian site, 4.1 that is on the mysql site is a RPM and I've had no luck installing rpm's on debian, even using alien. Ron On Oct 31, 2004, at 12:02 PM, Michael Stassen wrote: If you're talking about the earli

Re: mysql 4.1 + debian

If you're talking about the earlier message on this list, did you read the reply ? It doesn't appear you've installed the official MySQL binary package, as it's not labeled "experimental". I'd suggest downloading an official binary from the MySQL downloads

Re: MySQL 4.1 table/column names in UTF8

On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 01:03:22PM -0700, Brian Mansell wrote: > From http://dev.mysql.com/doc/mysql/en/Upgrading-from-4.0.html : > > "# Important note: MySQL 4.1 stores table names and column names in > UTF8. If you have table names or column names that use characters > outside of the range from

Re: MySQL 4.1 cluster, help with BUILD/compile-pentium-max

On Fri, Jul 23, 2004 at 05:37:08PM +0200, crandler wrote: > Hello, > > the following problem occurs when I want to configure MySQL 4.1: > > Building aclocal.m4 > Running autoheader to build config.hin > Running autoconf to build configure > 645046 > 644916 > Building RPC client/server files > Bui

Re: mysql 4.1 cluster

Michael Gale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Anyone running mysql 4.1 with cluster support ? Try the Mysql cluster list. > Is it sort of production ready ? The 4.1 release is labeled BETA. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Development_stage -- Per Andreas Buer -- MySQL General Mailing List Fo

Re: MySQL 4.1 - Full-Text using UTF-8

Mabye it is something connected to my.ini definitions? mysql> SHOW VARIABLES LIKE 'character%'; +--+ -+ | Variable_name| Value | +--+

Re: MySQL 4.1 Installation

first download and install Dynamic client libraries (including 3.23.x libraries) available on same page to satisfy the dependencies Enjoy Nitin - Original Message - From: "Nikos Gatsis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 6:01 PM Subject: MySQL 4.

Re: MySQL 4.1 Production Release

rom: "Tobias Asplund" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Newsgroups: mailing.database.myodbc Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 10:41 PM Subject: RE: MySQL 4.1 Production Release > On Tue, 6 Jan 2004, Knepley, Jim wrote: > > > Any chance that there's a quarterly strategic roadmap

RE: MySQL 4.1 Production Release

On Tue, 6 Jan 2004, Knepley, Jim wrote: > Any chance that there's a quarterly strategic roadmap published > somewhere? > > I have projects that sometimes depend on a feature in the next rev' or > some such, and I need to plan out for my organization... Difficult to > answer my boss when the depend

RE: MySQL 4.1 Production Release

ks Cc: MySQL List Subject: Re: MySQL 4.1 Production Release On Mon, 5 Jan 2004, Allen Weeks wrote: > Hi All, > > Just a quick question, does anyone have a good estimate of when ver > 4.1 will go production. When known bugs are fixed. You can read up on MySQL's releas

RE: MySQL 4.1 Production Release

n they're ready." -Original Message- From: Tobias Asplund [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 5:25 AM To: Allen Weeks Cc: MySQL List Subject: Re: MySQL 4.1 Production Release On Mon, 5 Jan 2004, Allen Weeks wrote: > Hi All, > > Just a quick question, does a

Re: MySQL 4.1 Production Release

On Mon, 5 Jan 2004, Allen Weeks wrote: > Hi All, > > Just a quick question, does anyone have a good estimate of when ver 4.1 will > go production. When known bugs are fixed. You can read up on MySQL's release policy here: http://www.mysql.com/doc/en/Release_philosophy.html -- MySQL General Maili

Re: MySQL 4.1 Beta Release

Puny, - Original Message - From: "Puny Sen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Newsgroups: mailing.database.myodbc Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 10:00 PM Subject: MySQL 4.1 Beta Release > --Boundary_(ID_9gZ0fPFbGnkpio2LXXaaOA) > Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Content-transfer-encodi

Re: MySQL 4.1 : curious privilege problems (grant, use, show databases)

Hi. Upgrading to 4.1.1 from 4.1.0 seems to solve my problem. There is no more (at the moment) curious privileges problems. Everything seem OK. Thanks to MySQL. N.B.: Please se the history of the problem bellow. Christophe. On Tue, 2 Dec 2003, Sergei Golubchik wrote: > Hi! > > On Nov 25, Chri

Re: MySQL 4.1 : curious privilege problems (grant, use, show databases)

Hi! On Nov 25, Christophe DIARRA wrote: > Hello. > > MySQL 4.1.0 is not respecting the registered privileges. ... > "show databases" displays an incorrect list of databases. Each user lists a > database it should not, and doesn't show all the databases it should. > Same thing with 'use ' : the

Re: MySQL 4.1 subqueries!

Simon Gentile <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > in version 4.1 states it supports subqueries like > > SELECT * FROM t1 WHERE (1,2,3) IN (SELECT a,b,c FROM > t2); > > it doesn't support 'IN' > > [Dissertation] ERROR 1235: This version of MySQL > doesn't yet support 'LIMIT & IN/ALL/ANY/SOME subquery'

Re mysql 4.1 subqueries

i implemented a very simple subquery using 'IN' and i get the same message "Dissertation] ERROR 1235: This version of MySQL doesn't yet support 'LIMIT & IN/ALL/ANY/SOME subquery'" other subqueries DO work, but i cant get one to work with 'IN' __

Re: MySQL 4.1 subqueries!

It does, I executed the following and it worked: SELECT * FROM table1 WHERE (field1, field2) IN (SELECT field1, field2 FROM table2) I think your problem is that you used constants (1,2,3) instead of using fields. Also I don't know if the fields don't need to be of the same type. I just need to ch

Re: MySQL 4.1 replication relay log control

At 13:26 -0500 10/11/03, Christopher L. Everett wrote: Victoria Reznichenko wrote: relay-log-purge is available from 4.1.1. Do you use 4.1.1 or 4.1.0? Is it in the manual because relay-log-purge is available in 4.0.x? Sorry, what? AFAICT, 4.1.1 isn't available for download from the mysql.com sit

Re: MySQL 4.1 replication relay log control

Victoria Reznichenko wrote: relay-log-purge is available from 4.1.1. Do you use 4.1.1 or 4.1.0? Is it in the manual because relay-log-purge is available in 4.0.x? AFAICT, 4.1.1 isn't available for download from the mysql.com site. 4.1.0-alpha is. How would one obtain 4.1.1? Would this work to m

Re: MySQL 4.1 and TIMESTAMP Column Types

Scott Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > DROP TABLE IF EXISTS t; > CREATE TABLE t (ts TIMESTAMP, i INT); > INSERT INTO t (i) VALUES(0); > SELECT * FROM t; > > At this point, the timestamp field is un-interpretable. SELECT returns > -00-00 9:01 AM > > UPDATE t SET i = i + 1; > SELECT * FROM t

Re: MySQL 4.1 replication relay log control

"Christopher L. Everett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The online manual at http://www.mysql.com/doc/en/Replication_Options.html > > says that these two variables: > > max-relay-log-size=# > relay-log-purge=0|1 > > exist to control the size of the relay log. But when I try to start my > slave s

Re: MySQL 4.1 and TIMESTAMP Column Types

DROP TABLE IF EXISTS t; CREATE TABLE t (ts TIMESTAMP, i INT); INSERT INTO t (i) VALUES(0); SELECT * FROM t; At this point, the timestamp field is un-interpretable. SELECT returns -00-00 9:01 AM UPDATE t SET i = i + 1; SELECT * FROM t; Returns the same thing; -00-00 9:01 AM. JFYI, none of

Re: MySQL 4.1 and TIMESTAMP Column Types

At 14:53 -0700 10/9/03, Scott Brown wrote: I am running MySQL 4.1 in a sandbox, trying to test some code against it. No matter what, even when no value is explicitly applied, or the field is not explicitly named in a SQL statement, the TIMESTAMP column refuses to update. I have tested this with

RE: MySQL 4.1 Date Comparing

This should work, but will not use any index on date_field: SELECT field FROM table WHERE DATE_FORMAT(date_field, "%Y-%m-%d") = '2003-10-10'; This is better and will allow an index to be used if appropriate: SELECT field FROM table WHERE date_field >= "2003-10-10 00:00:00" AND date_field < DATE_A

Re: MySQL 4.1, derived tables, and privileges

Michael Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I hope someone can help me on this. I've searched the mailing list > archives and the manual and can't find anything, except for user comments > in the manual that confirm what I'm finding. > > I'm using derived tables users with restricted privileges

RE: MySQL 4.1, derived tables, and privileges

Dude ... You got the same name as me ... So does that mean I can blame any idiotic statements I make on you ? We got a popular name. Mike -Original Message- From: Michael Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 8:51 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: MySQL 4.1

Re: MySQL 4.1 Question

On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 10:33:21AM -0700, Richard Sumilang wrote: > Anyone know when it will be considered production stable? When it's stable. http://www.mysql.com/doc/en/Release_philosophy.html -- Jeremy D. Zawodny | Perl, Web, MySQL, Linux Magazine, Yahoo! <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | http://

Re: MySQL 4.1 and PHP/Perl Clients

On June 25, 2003 09:59, PAUL MENARD wrote: ... > > I've been considering upgrading my data , MySQL > > 3.23.42 to 4.013 or even going to 4.1. I've read on > > the MySQL upgrade documents that some client might be > > affected when upgrading to 4.1. It does specifically > > mention Perl which I use

Re: mysql 4.1 client authentication

Uuups I meant 16 bytes and 45 bytes of course ;-) - otherwise anybody with a 286 could have found out ;-) Best regards Nils Valentin Tokyo/Japan 2003年 6月 25日 水曜日 07:35、Nils Valentin さんは書きました: > in Version 4.1 the passwords are 45 bits > in Version <4.1 passwords are 16 bits > > Upgrade your cl

Re: mysql 4.1 client authentication

in Version 4.1 the passwords are 45 bits in Version <4.1 passwords are 16 bits Upgrade your client will make it work again. You sould be able to connect from any 4.1 mysql client. Best regards 2003年 6月 25日 水曜日 03:[EMAIL PROTECTED] さんは書きました: > Does anyone know what is different in mysql 4.1 clie

Re: mysql 4.1 authentication problems

Funny. I was just readin about this on the www.mysql.com web site. Under the documentation section about upgrading form 3.23 to 4.0. The exact URL is http://www.mysql.com/doc/en/Upgrading-from-3.23.html Ensure that you don't have any MySQL clients that use shared libraries (like the Perl DB

RE: MySQL 4.1 and MyCC

(with MySQLCC) to an account that has a short password or a long one? -Original Message- From: Paul DuBois [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 5:08 PM To: Peter Burden Cc: Christensen, Dave; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: Re: MySQL 4.1 and MyCC At 23:18 +0100

RE: MySQL 4.1 and MyCC

ent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 5:19 PM To: Paul DuBois Cc: Christensen, Dave; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: Re: MySQL 4.1 and MyCC Paul DuBois wrote: > At 11:55 -0500 6/11/03, Christensen, Dave wrote: > >> I upgraded my test MySQL server yesterday to 4.1 and I'm now >&

RE: MySQL 4.1 and MyCC

Peter Burden Cc: Christensen, Dave; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: Re: MySQL 4.1 and MyCC At 23:18 +0100 6/11/03, Peter Burden wrote: >Paul DuBois wrote: > >>At 11:55 -0500 6/11/03, Christensen, Dave wrote: >> >>>I upgraded my test MySQL server yesterday to 4.1 and I

Re: MySQL 4.1 and MyCC

At 23:18 +0100 6/11/03, Peter Burden wrote: Paul DuBois wrote: At 11:55 -0500 6/11/03, Christensen, Dave wrote: I upgraded my test MySQL server yesterday to 4.1 and I'm now receiving an error when I try to connect using MyCC. The error is ERROR 1249: Client does not support authentification pr

Re: MySQL 4.1 and MyCC

Paul DuBois wrote: At 11:55 -0500 6/11/03, Christensen, Dave wrote: I upgraded my test MySQL server yesterday to 4.1 and I'm now receiving an error when I try to connect using MyCC. The error is ERROR 1249: Client does not support authentification protocol requested by server. Consider upgra

Re: MySQL 4.1 and MyCC

At 11:55 -0500 6/11/03, Christensen, Dave wrote: I upgraded my test MySQL server yesterday to 4.1 and I'm now receiving an error when I try to connect using MyCC. The error is ERROR 1249: Client does not support authentification protocol requested by server. Consider upgrading MySQL client. I'v

RE: MySQL 4.1 and MyCC

or message. -Original Message- From: Karam Chand [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 1:30 PM To: Christensen, Dave Subject: Re: MySQL 4.1 and MyCC MyCC does not support MySQL 4.1 coz the the library to connect to MySQL 4.1 has changed. Karam --- "Ch

Re: MySQL 4.1

On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 09:42:36AM +, Martin Hudec wrote: > Hello, > > can anyone tell me estimated production release for mysql 4.1? We > are now testing it in development enviroment, and it looks like we > will be utilizing its variable charsets per table, column etc. :). My educated guess

Re: MySQL 4.1 for OS X compiling problems

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, 20 Mar 2003, Michael Edlund wrote: > Yes, the compilation passed that point now. However, unfortunately it > got stuck in another place: > ld: Undefined symbols: > _rnd This was caused by a bad merge from 4.0 into 4.1 - it should have been f

Re: MySQL 4.1 for OS X compiling problems

Thanks for reporting this - it should now be fixed. Bye, LenZ Yes, the compilation passed that point now. However, unfortunately it got stuck in another place: --- snip --- mkdir .libs g++ -O3 -DDBUG_OFF -fno-implicit-templates -fno-exceptions -fno-rtti -traditional-cpp -DHAVE_DARWIN_THRE

Re: MySQL 4.1 for OS X compiling problems

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, On Wed, 19 Mar 2003, Michael Edlund wrote: > I'm trying to compile MySQL 4.1 on Mac OS 10.2.4 (Darwin Kernel Version > 6.4) but run into some problems. When following the general compilation > guidelines... [...] > ...the make process exits wit

Re: mysql 4.1 clustering/hign avaliability

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Kissandrakis -- ...and then Kissandrakis Giorgos said... % % Hello, Hi! % ... % Does mysql 4.1 have any extra culstering capabilities? I don't know about mysql directly, but I'm sure it would work just fine as an application under an OS cluster.

Re: RE: MySql 4.1 Sub Selects and not stored procedures

iginal Message - > From: "Dan Rossi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Victoria Reznichenko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 11:04 PM > Subject: RE: RE: MySql 4.1 Sub Selects > > > > damn , i read it was

Re: RE: MySql 4.1 Sub Selects and not stored procedures

ot; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 12:02 AM Subject: RE: RE: MySql 4.1 Sub Selects and not stored procedures > I'm not sure where you're getting your information ("Typically, db vendors > recommend you use an exists clause,

Re: MySql 4.1 Sub Selects and not stored procedures

In the last episode (Nov 11), Greg Matthews said: > > hey, can i hijack my message back?...this thread is about the performance of > subselects, not stored procedures. go write your own message :-)... > > sothe original question is if someone would be nice enough to answer.. > > > Do any

Re: MySql 4.1 Sub Selects

Dan Rossi wrote: damn , i read it was 4.1 i guess we have to wait a bit then, i wish i could program some c ++ to hurry it along a bit, i dont really have access to DB's like oracle to learn stored procedure stuff Don't forget that with MySQL, you can link in external procedures though ... i

RE: RE: MySql 4.1 Sub Selects and not stored procedures

0:0:02 Arthur -Original Message- From: Greg Matthews [mailto:greg55@;ozemail.com.au] Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 7:38 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: RE: MySql 4.1 Sub Selects and not stored procedures hey, can i hijack my message back?...this thread is about the perform

Re: RE: MySql 4.1 Sub Selects and not stored procedures

aid is null Thanks, Greg. - Original Message - From: "Dan Rossi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Victoria Reznichenko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 11:04 PM Subject: RE: RE: MySql 4.1 Sub Selects > damn , i read it

RE: RE: MySql 4.1 Sub Selects

Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 11:00 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: re: RE: MySql 4.1 Sub Selects daniel, Monday, November 11, 2002, 3:51:25 AM, you wrote: d> will 4.1 hopefully have stored procedure functionality ? Nope. Stored procedures will be implemented around v5.0 -- For t

re: RE: MySql 4.1 Sub Selects

daniel, Monday, November 11, 2002, 3:51:25 AM, you wrote: d> will 4.1 hopefully have stored procedure functionality ? Nope. Stored procedures will be implemented around v5.0 -- For technical support contracts, goto https://order.mysql.com/?ref=ensita This email is sponsored by Ensita.net http:

RE: MySql 4.1 Sub Selects

<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "Greg Matthews" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 11:16 AM >Subject: Re: MySql 4.1 Sub Selects > > >> Greg Matthews wrote: >> >> >clause) instead of EXISTS -- seems

Re: MySql 4.1 Sub Selects

-- Original Message - From: "Michael T. Babcock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Greg Matthews" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 11:16 AM Subject: Re: MySql 4.1 Sub Selects > Greg Matthews wrote: > > >clause) in

Re: MySql 4.1 Sub Selects

Greg Matthews wrote: clause) instead of EXISTS -- seems like a "tail wagging the dog" strategy. Isn't EXISTS a lot more efficient than an inner join? Well, its more efficient if it exists, I guess ... but if it doesn't exist on your platform (MySQL), then its pretty inefficient, really. We'r

Re: MySql 4.1 Sub Selects

d Fuchs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2002 11:16 PM Subject: Re: MySql 4.1 Sub Selects > In article <014701c288a4$1b1bb550$0100a8c0@dev>, > "Greg Matthews" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Your call.

Re: MySql 4.1 Sub Selects

On Sun, Nov 10, 2002 at 09:29:52PM +1100, Greg Matthews wrote: > Jeremy, > > I'm not a C/C++ coder so couldn't really help unless a binary was > available. > > At the same time, I understand that you'd be wasting your time building > binaries unless you were happy that the code was at a certain l

Re: MySql 4.1 Sub Selects

t; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Greg Matthews" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2002 9:00 PM Subject: Re: MySql 4.1 Sub Selects > On Sun, Nov 10, 2002 at 05:51:43PM +1100, Greg Matthews wrote: > > > > It would be a huge help to

Re: MySql 4.1 Sub Selects

t yet optimised (it will be started after finishing main subselect constructions). Regards, Jocelyn - Original Message - From: "Jeremy Zawodny" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Greg Matthews" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, November 1

Re: MySql 4.1 Sub Selects

On Sun, Nov 10, 2002 at 05:51:43PM +1100, Greg Matthews wrote: > > It would be a huge help to get hold of MySql 4.1. > > What's "shaken out" mean? Is 4.1 still mid-development, or is it in > alpha, more or less finished, and needs debugging? > > Is there anyway soon that someone could build and

Re: MySql 4.1 Sub Selects

is in a semi-usable state. Greg. - Original Message - From: "Jeremy Zawodny" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Greg Matthews" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2002 4:21 PM Subject: Re: MySql 4.1 Sub Selects >

Re: MySql 4.1 Sub Selects

On Sun, Nov 10, 2002 at 03:45:04PM +1100, Greg Matthews wrote: > All, > > Anyone have any rough idea when 4.1 (with SubSelects) is due to be released? Well, if you pull the source code, it's there. But I suspect it'll be a few months before you start seeing pre-built binaries available. There's

Re: RE: mysql 4.1?

Aron, Tuesday, August 13, 2002, 4:58:40 PM, you wrote: AP> Sorry, but I can't seem to locate the page that addresses this question AP> specifically -- so, what version is scheduled to support views? Views will come around v5.1 -- For technical support contracts, goto https://order.mysql.com

RE: mysql 4.1?

[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: mysql 4.1? > > > Florian, > Monday, August 12, 2002, 7:37:37 PM, you wrote: > > FL> when the version of mysql 4.1 is ready ? > > 4.1 will come before this year ends. > > > > > -- > For technical support contracts, goto

Re: mysql 4.1?

Florian, Monday, August 12, 2002, 7:37:37 PM, you wrote: FL> when the version of mysql 4.1 is ready ? 4.1 will come before this year ends. -- For technical support contracts, goto https://order.mysql.com/?ref=ensita This email is sponsored by Ensita.net http://www.ensita.net/ __ ___

Re: MySQL 4.1 with Stored Procedure release date?

Julian: In my experience, MySQL doesn't project release dates. The surest way to avoid pulling a Microsoft (miss release dates) is not to project release dates in the first place. As I understand it, they are working through the to-do list (http://www.mysql.com/doc/T/O/TODO_MySQL_4.0.html) in 4.

RE: MySQL 4.1 with Stored Procedure release date?

last I heard it was 'sometime before the end of the year.' =C= * * Cal Evans * Journeyman Programmer * Techno-Mage * http://www.calevans.com * -Original Message- From: Julian Htun [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, June 29, 2002 9:34 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: MySQL 4.1

  1   2   >