o: "Rolf Hopkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 3:03
Subject: Re: --skip-locking on Redhat 6.1 Linux
> Rolf Hopkins [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> > Firstly, I'm curious as to why you need --skip-locking in the first
pla
Original Message -
> From: "Hardy Merrill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Rolf Hopkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 23:15
> Subject: Re: --skip-locking on Redhat 6.1 Linux
>
>
> > Ro
esday, February 07, 2001 23:15
Subject: Re: --skip-locking on Redhat 6.1 Linux
> Rolf, I'm invoking safe_mysqld with --skip-locking and
> --log-update=update_log, among other options. If I run
> mysqladmin flush-logs while database updates are occurring,
> the update logs someti
Rolf, I'm invoking safe_mysqld with --skip-locking and
--log-update=update_log, among other options. If I run
mysqladmin flush-logs while database updates are occurring,
the update logs sometimes get confused - the scheme I have
is basically
mysqladmin flush-logs
mv name_of_old_update_log
can: yes
should: That's up to you but personally I wouldn't
- Original Message -
From: "Hardy Merrill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 3:31
Subject: --skip-locking on Redhat 6.1 Linux
> Can/should MySQL be started *without* --skip-locking o
