On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 8:35 PM, Johnny Withers wrote:
>
> Now when i run the same show table status command, the comment field says:
> InnoDB free: 6144 kB
>
> Is that telling me that I only have 6MB of storage left even though I
> increased the table space by 8GB?
>
I seem to recall - but am o
Hi Johnny,
Sorry about that - i just overlooked and the simple way to calculate the
sizes is to query the information_schema table called "tables" for data and
index sizes.
On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 8:55 PM, Johnny Withers wrote:
> About the above - it is saying 6144 KB so it is 6.1 GB.
>
> Ar
About the above - it is saying 6144 KB so it is 6.1 GB.
Are you sure? I would think 6144KB = 6.144 MB, or 6144 * 1000 = 6,144,000
bytes.
I think since InnoDB, by default, extends the table space by 8MB increments,
this is reporting the free space in this increment. How can I tell total
remain
Hey john,
Yes you can add it but safe to keep auto-extend at the end and monitor the
disk space as well.
"Now when i run the same show table status command, the comment field says:
InnoDB free: 6144 kB
Is that telling me that I only have 6MB of storage left even though I
increased the table spac
In the last episode (Jun 15), Ben Clewett said:
> > Are there any reasons why one would NOT use separate ibd files for
> > each table
>
> Fragmentation for one.
>
> A single file can re-use empty space from deleted rows for any added
> rows. A single file can only re-use space from that one
Olaf Stein wrote:
Hi all,
Are there any reasons why one would NOT use separate ibd files for each
table (--innodb_file_per_table). It seems logical to me to separate what
does not belong together logically (different databases), but I as the
shared tablespace is the default I wonder if it has na
> Hi all,
>
> Are there any reasons why one would NOT use separate ibd files for each
> table
Fragmentation for one.
A single file can re-use empty space from deleted rows for any added
rows. A single file can only re-use space from that one file.
Therefore the sum table size will be larger
Hi All,
If you specify one file per table, these files would be created under the
database directory of that particular database . So, the benifit with
respect to IO is negative. To have these files placed in different file
system to get IO benifit, you need to use symbolic links.
Please correct
From: "Andreas Schildbach"
> Is it possible to configure MySQL so that it uses one InnoDB tablespace
> file per database schema, instead of mixing all data into the shared
> tablespace?
No, but you can use a file per table:
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/mysql/en/multiple-tablespaces.html
It still uses
Depends on your disk setup. Remember a table space is a virtual
filesystem that sits on top of the OS. Having one large file and
chopping a contiguous block of the disk out enables better seeks as well
as caching if the file doesn't bust the system cache. In your case it
will. One file needs to be
David Griffiths writes:
>Oracle cannot shrink datafiles (same idea as InnoDB datafiles) when data
>is deleted either.
Actually, Oracle has been able to resize data files since 7.2. It
is usually done with an 'alter tablespace ... coalesce' followed by an
'alter tablespace datafile ... resiz
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Jeff Mathis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> my understanding is that the datafiles are created when the server
> initializes, and this this is the designed and expected behavior. Most
> other database products use a similar model. Your scenario cannot
> happen. You sp
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: InnoDB TableSpace Question
Oracle cannot shrink datafiles (same idea as InnoDB datafiles) when data
is deleted either.
David
Marc Slemko wrote:
>On Tue, 3 Aug 2004 12:42:03 -0400 , David Seltzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>
>>Thanks Marc,
Actually, Oracle can shrink or grow datafiles:
ALTER DATABASE DATAFILE '/usr01/oracle/sid/data001' resize 200M;
On Aug 3, 2004, at 15:59, David Griffiths wrote:
Oracle cannot shrink datafiles (same idea as InnoDB datafiles) when
data is deleted either.
David
Marc Slemko wrote:
On Tue, 3 Aug 2004
Oracle cannot shrink datafiles (same idea as InnoDB datafiles) when data
is deleted either.
David
Marc Slemko wrote:
On Tue, 3 Aug 2004 12:42:03 -0400 , David Seltzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thanks Marc,
Is there really no way to reclaim unused space in an InnoDB table space? If
not, why is
On Tue, Aug 03, 2004 at 01:08:58PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I agree with David. If there is no present way to recover unused
> InnoDB tablespace, then we (as a community) seriously need to create
> a tool to do just that. How have we gone so long without it?
Because it's just not a pro
gt;
>>
>>>Thanks Marc,
>>>
>>>Is there really no way to reclaim unused space in an InnoDB table
>>> space?
>>
>> If
>>
>>>not, why is this not considered a tremendous limitation?
>>>
>>>-Dave Seltzer
>>>
>
PM
To: David Seltzer
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: InnoDB TableSpace Question
On Tue, 3 Aug 2004 10:07:25 -0400 , David Seltzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Hi all,
I've been searching the archives & mysql documentation for a while and
I
can't seem to find an answer to my qu
:09 PM
To: David Seltzer
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: InnoDB TableSpace Question
I agree with David. If there is no present way to recover unused InnoDB
tablespace, then we (as a community) seriously need to create a tool to do
just that. How have we gone so long without it? I always
From: Marc Slemko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2004 12:31 PM
> To: David Seltzer
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: InnoDB TableSpace Question
>
> On Tue, 3 Aug 2004 10:07:25 -0400 , David Seltzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Hi all,
>
On Tue, 3 Aug 2004 12:42:03 -0400 , David Seltzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks Marc,
>
> Is there really no way to reclaim unused space in an InnoDB table space? If
> not, why is this not considered a tremendous limitation?
Some do consider it a tremendous limitation. It all depends on ho
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: InnoDB TableSpace Question
On Tue, 3 Aug 2004 10:07:25 -0400 , David Seltzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've been searching the archives & mysql documentation for a while and I
> can't seem to find an answer to my questio
On Tue, 3 Aug 2004 10:07:25 -0400 , David Seltzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've been searching the archives & mysql documentation for a while and I
> can't seem to find an answer to my question -
>
> Is there a way to force InnoDB to shrink its filesize? I just dropped a 7GB
> tab
At 14:50 +0200 10/25/02, Natale Babbo wrote:
innodb_data_file_path=ibdata1:100M:autoextended:max:200M
anyone knows what happen if the above innodb
tablespace reach the limit of 200M?
It stops getting bigger. :-)
What do you mean by "what happen"? That is, what are the conditions
for which you
My guess is that you can not operate the db when space is required and you
get error message. Like when trying to alter a table it will tell you that
the table is full. This is because MySQL will create a temporary table drop
the original and rename the new one.
HTH
JFernando
-Original Mes
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Friday 25 October 2002 14:50, Natale Babbo wrote:
> innodb_data_file_path=ibdata1:100M:autoextended:max:200M
>
> anyone knows what happen if the above innodb
> tablespace reach the limit of 200M?
I would assume you will get an error: "table space
26 matches
Mail list logo
