Hi!
Sorry for delayed answer - I was on vacations...
On Dec 08, Uros Kotnik wrote:
OK, I will give you more details.
Table CDS, have 1,053,794 rows, FT index on title,
Data 67,646 KB, Index 70,401 KB
Table ARTISTS, Rows 292,330, FT on name,
Data 8,096 KB
Index 17,218 KB
Table
Message-
From: Chuck Gadd [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 21:50
To: Uros Kotnik; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Speed difference between boolean full-text searches and
full-text searches
Uros Kotnik wrote:
It makes sense, but Sergei G. said :
And are you sure
+2001' IN BOOLEAN MODE)
and artists.artistid = cds.artistid AND artists.artistid =
tracks.artistid AND cds.cdid = tracks.cdid
-Original Message-
From: Chuck Gadd [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 21:50
To: Uros Kotnik; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Speed
Message-
From: Sergei Golubchik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 00:02
To: Uros Kotnik
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Speed difference between boolean full-text searches and
full-text searches
Hi!
On Nov 27, Uros Kotnik wrote:
Executing this SQL, takes ~5 sec
Message-
From: Sergei Golubchik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 00:02
To: Uros Kotnik
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Speed difference between boolean full-text searches and
full-text searches
Hi!
On Nov 27, Uros Kotnik wrote:
Executing this SQL, takes ~5 sec
Uros Kotnik wrote:
Time for first SQL : 21 sec.
SELECT artists.name, cds.title, tracks.title FROM artists, cds, tracks
WHERE artists.artistid = cds.artistid AND artists.artistid =
tracks.artistid AND cds.cdid = tracks.cdid AND MATCH (artists.name)
AGAINST ('madonna'IN BOOLEAN MODE) AND
MATCH
Gadd [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 13:17
To: Uros Kotnik; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Speed difference between boolean full-text searches and
full-text searches
Uros Kotnik wrote:
Time for first SQL : 21 sec.
SELECT artists.name, cds.title, tracks.title FROM
Uros Kotnik wrote:
It makes sense, but Sergei G. said :
And are you sure the numbers are correct, the first query - the one
without IN BOOLEAN MODE - is faster ? I would expect the opposite.
I guess that for my DB I can't expect satisfied in boolena mode times
?
But also when searching without
) AGAINST ('madonna' IN BOOLEAN MODE)
and MATCH (cds.title) AGAINST ('music mix 2001' IN BOOLEAN MODE)
limit 1001
Same result but the speed difference is quite a different, why is that ?
What does EXPLAIN show for both queries ?
And are you sure the numbers are correct, the first query - the one
= tracks.cdid
and artists.name like '%madonna%'
and cds.title like '%music mix 2001%'
Same result but the speed difference is quite a different, why is that ?
This is only on test DB, I didn't try it on real life DB where I have
~14 mil. rows in tracks table.
Regards
artists.artistid = tracks.artistid and cds.cdid = tracks.cdid
and artists.name like '%madonna%'
and cds.title like '%music mix 2001%'
Same result but the speed difference is quite a different, why is that ?
This is only on test DB, I didn't try it on real life DB where I have
~14 mil. rows in tracks
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 11:50
To: Uros Kotnik
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Once again, three queries, same result, huge speed
difference
On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, Uros Kotnik wrote:
I posted this few days ago, but with no answer, also posted it to
benchmark list
or the fastest. Doing it this way will make sure that
the cache is used equally for all queries.
You should also do and EXPLAIN to see how MySQL is executing each query.
On Dec 4, 2003, at 5:35 AM, Uros Kotnik wrote:
Same result but the speed difference is quite a different, why is that
?
This is only
or the fastest. Doing it this way will make sure that
the cache is used equally for all queries.
You should also do and EXPLAIN to see how MySQL is executing each query.
On Dec 4, 2003, at 5:35 AM, Uros Kotnik wrote:
Same result but the speed difference is quite a different, why
It's not the order in which you execute the queries, it's how many
time. Execute the first one 5 times, then the second one 5 times, then
the third one 5 times. See if the times are different between each of
the 5 runs for each query.
Also, you could try reordering your query. Perhaps
(cds.title) AGAINST ('music mix 2001' IN BOOLEAN MODE) limit
1001
Same result but the speed difference is quite a different, why is that ?
Regards
Hi All,
I have tried out some performance testing with some heavy SELECT and
UPDATES. The database in question has only 500 records but there are lots of
SELECTs and UPDATEs and the results are:
after timing the program that was targeting MySQL on different platforms
the results are (client
: after timing the program that was targeting MySQL on different platforms
: the results are (client program running always from the same box that is not
: hosting MySQL):
:
: Windows NT - 25 sec (Intel P-III)
: Linux - 27 sec (Intel P-III)
: Solaris 2.7 - 1 min 40 sec
: Sherzod Ruzmetov aka sherzodR [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, 5 February 2002 11:14 AM
To: Nesh Nenad Mijailovic
Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: Re: Speed difference
: after timing the program that was targeting MySQL on different
platforms
: the results are (client program
Nesh,
With all of the benchmark test I have used the same DB structure, same
TABLE structure, and finally same iterations.
This probably means that Solaris I/O is really poor, or there is some other
explanation (like changing some kernel parameters to get Solaris working
well with DB
The boxes running the MySQL were isolated from other users so there was no
activity on them while I was performing the benchmark tests.
There was no tuning - I just installed the MySQL from their binary
packages, that is I was using the default config files (hoping that they are
the same - I
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 07:09:23PM -0700, S A wrote:
How much if at all slower should a BETA-LOG build of MySQL be than
one that doesn't log ?
We have on BSD 3.23.26-beta-log which is MUCH slower than 3.23.32 on
Linux.
It depends on how IO and CPU bound your system is. It could be
22 matches
Mail list logo
