Thanks a lot
On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 10:59 AM, Rob Wultsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 6, 2008 at 9:57 PM, Eric Bergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > I don't see what the issue is. As Jay said the row counts in explain
> > outputs are estimates. When running an explain query MySQL
On Sun, Apr 6, 2008 at 9:57 PM, Eric Bergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't see what the issue is. As Jay said the row counts in explain
> outputs are estimates. When running an explain query MySQL asks the
> storage engine how many rows it thinks are between a set of values for
> an index.
I don't see what the issue is. As Jay said the row counts in explain
outputs are estimates. When running an explain query MySQL asks the
storage engine how many rows it thinks are between a set of values for
an index. Different storage engines use different methods to calculate
row count. Both inno
Just waiting for any reply .
On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 11:01 PM, Jay Pipes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Please actually read my reply before asking the same question. As I
> stated, InnoDB outputs *estimated* row counts in EXPLAIN, whereas MyISAM
> outputs *accurate* row counts.
>
> -jay
>
> Krishn
Please actually read my reply before asking the same question. As I
stated, InnoDB outputs *estimated* row counts in EXPLAIN, whereas MyISAM
outputs *accurate* row counts.
-jay
Krishna Chandra Prajapati wrote:
Hi,
On myisam storage system
mysql> explain select ui.user_id, ucp.user_id,ucp.p
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 11:32 PM, Krishna Chandra Prajapati
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On myisam storage system
>
> mysql> explain select ui.user_id, ucp.user_id,ucp.payment_date from
> user_info ui, user_course_payment ucp where ui.user_id=ucp.user_id;
> ++-+---+--
Hi,
On myisam storage system
mysql> explain select ui.user_id, ucp.user_id,ucp.payment_date from
user_info ui, user_course_payment ucp where ui.user_id=ucp.user_id;
++-+---++---+---+-+-++--
Hi,
I have executed ANALYZE TABLE for myisam tables, but still myisam is showing
more scanning of rows as compared to innodb. What does ANALYZE TABLE command
exactly do for myisam storage engine.
Thanks
Krishna
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 9:48 PM, Rob Wultsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 8:52 AM, Jay Pipes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The MyISAM isn't scanning more rows. It's that the InnoDB "rows" output in
> EXPLAIN is an estimate and the MyISAM one is accurate...
>
> -jay
Also, if he was testing one storage engine vs another he might have
dumped the ta
The MyISAM isn't scanning more rows. It's that the InnoDB "rows" output
in EXPLAIN is an estimate and the MyISAM one is accurate...
-jay
Krishna Chandra Prajapati wrote:
Hi All,
I have same table configuration, every thing same except the storage engine.
Explain result on innodb system
mys
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 5:06 AM, Krishna Chandra Prajapati <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Horribly ugly stuff
>
I know I sure as heck am not going to spend half an hour to turn those
queries into something understandable, and I expect no one else will
either. If you want help please remove all
At 08:38 AM 1/4/2007, you wrote:
Hi,
I have seen that by default some tables are created as InnoDB and some as
MyISAM.
I guess the table type is not chosen randomly. How is it chosen the table
engine used?
And is InnoDB recommended now?
If you need transactions or RI.
Does it support f
Octavian,
1) You can use MyISAM for example when you use static information in a
webpage. For example, only for store information of customers, something
like that..
2) Innodb is a engine that support ACID, you can use for transactions. For
example, load information of sales from PDA ( field)
And is InnoDB recommended now?
It depends.. :)
Depends on... what?
I mean, if I don't need transactions, is there another reason for using
InnoDB?
If it is necessary I can build the client program without foreign keys
support also.
Thanks.
Octavian
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For li
InnoDB supports foreign keys, MyISAM does not.
MyISAM supports full text indices, InnoDB does not.
This is unfortunate. It has kept me using MyISAM where I'd rather use
InnoDB, although fortunately none of my applications are really hampered by
it.
The only work-around I can think of is to creat
On 2007-01-04 Octavian Rasnita wrote:
> I have seen that by default some tables are created as InnoDB and some as
> MyISAM.
>
> I guess the table type is not chosen randomly. How is it chosen the table
> engine used?
You can set a global and IIRC a database specific default for the database
typ
Hi.
Thanks for your response>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do you have any idexes on the table?
No.
The table looks like this.
Would there be any advantage in creating indexes for it?
| id | | LastUpdated|
| 32957c615b37b5674f99d1cfd06d6a23 | | 2006041607561
Do you have any idexes on the table?
What does your
mysql> show create table tbl_name \G
statement look like please?
Keith
In theory, theory and practice are the same;
in practice they are not.
On Thu, 13 Apr 2006, Luke Vanderfluit wrote:
> To: mysql@lists.mysql.com
> From: Luke Vanderfluit
At 02:37 PM 10/23/2003, you wrote:
I thought I read a message on this list that said you can't use full text
indexes with InnoDB yet. Can anyone confirm that?
- Gabriel
On Thursday, October 23, 2003, at 11:50 AM, Travis Reeder wrote:
I'm sure this has been asked before, but after seeing some b
I thought I read a message on this list that said you can't use full
text indexes with InnoDB yet. Can anyone confirm that?
- Gabriel
On Thursday, October 23, 2003, at 11:50 AM, Travis Reeder wrote:
I'm sure this has been asked before, but after seeing some benchmarks,
it looks like using inn
In the last episode (Oct 24), Chris Nolan said:
> The answer is actually quite simple!
>
> There are a few reasons:
>
> 1. Features.
>
> Each table type has something over the other. While InnoDB has transactions,
> foreign keys, hot backup capabilities, consistant read and better write
> concu
The answer is actually quite simple!
There are a few reasons:
1. Features.
Each table type has something over the other. While InnoDB has transactions,
foreign keys, hot backup capabilities, consistant read and better write
concurrency (for many situations), MyISAM has FULLTEXT indexes, the
opt
At 12:23 PM 10/9/2003, you wrote:
Hi guys,
Do both MyISAM tables and INNODB tables support foreign keys in 4.0.15?
If so, are the main advantages of using INNODB tables the added features
of transactions, cascading deletes, and it's other more robust features?
Any thoughts on any disadvantages of
On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 01:23:39PM -0400, Don Vu wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> Do both MyISAM tables and INNODB tables support foreign keys in
> 4.0.15?
No.
--
Jeremy D. Zawodny | Perl, Web, MySQL, Linux Magazine, Yahoo!
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | http://jeremy.zawodny.com/
MySQL 4.0.15-Yahoo-SMP: u
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 01:26:42PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Anyone knows the reason of this disk usage of innoDB (it's 2 time
> bigger than myISAM)
InnoDB has larger per-record overhead (row headers and such).
--
Jeremy D. Zawodny | Perl, Web, MySQL, Linux Magazine, Yahoo!
<[EMAI
Just to contribute our anecdotal experience, we also found a 2x increase
in space required when we converted our MyISAM tables over to InnoDB.
While it was surprising, it wasn't unexpected. We just had to go buy
another 60GB of disk space (luckily we had planned for this). :)
Owen
On Wed, 2002-
On Fri, 9 Aug 2002, Thomas Seifert wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Aug 2002 03:02:40 -0700
> Jeremy Zawodny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> > > btw:
> > > I did a quick benchmark with mysql4 and its query caching running with
> > > innodb.
> > > Quite impressive, the app run with double the number of pages
On Fri, Aug 09, 2002 at 09:21:13PM +0200, Thomas Seifert wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Aug 2002 03:02:40 -0700
> Jeremy Zawodny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Excellent. MySQL 4.0.{2,3} is working well for us too.
>
> Is there 4.0.3 already somewhere to download?
Not yet. I believe there will be a 4.0
On Thu, 8 Aug 2002 03:02:40 -0700
Jeremy Zawodny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > btw:
> > I did a quick benchmark with mysql4 and its query caching running with
> > innodb.
> > Quite impressive, the app run with double the number of pages per second as
> > before.
>
> Excellent. MySQL 4.0.{2,3}
Hi!
On Dec 04, Gurupartap Davis wrote:
> I'm converting a table to innodb from myisam in mysql 4.0 and I was
> wondering why it takes sooo long to do a SELECT COUNT(*)
MyISAM stores total number of rows in MYI file header.
It's read into memory when table is opened.
So for SELECT COUNT(*) FROM
I believe the MyISAM format is so fast on simple SELECT count(*) FROM table;
because it actually keeps the current number of rows as a table statistic -
so it doesnt have to look at the data at all. Using a WHERE clause, however,
will force MyISAM to actually select all the rows and count how many
31 matches
Mail list logo
