switch from gemini to innodb bottlnecks
I've recently switched from GEMINI to INNODB, to be able to get continued support and upgrades of MySQL. I'm running into to some major performance issues. The section in the MySQL manual is not very thorough on optimizing INNODB. I'm getting two problems, either all my queries pile up, or a 'show processlist' shows 50 sleeping processes that should be hard at work, either way everything comes to a crawl. The database server is a dedicated 2CPU pIII 2.6Ghz, 2GB RAM, with a 14 hardrive (10k) Raid5 array. Pretty much every query uses indexed fields, so things should be fast, I get the impression that there is a locking issue going on, but as I understood it, INNDOB is supposed to do row level locking? I haven't had this problem with GEMINI in the past. Can anyone give me some improvement suggestions? = 031105 10:51:32 INNODB MONITOR OUTPUT = Per second averages calculated from the last 2 seconds -- SEMAPHORES -- OS WAIT ARRAY INFO: reservation count 3528797, signal count 2864755 --Thread 1105938 has waited at btr0cur.c line 390 for 1.00 seconds the semaphore: S-lock on RW-latch at 92b43f74 created in file buf0buf.c line 444 a writer (thread id 1105938) has reserved it in mode exclusive number of readers 0, waiters flag 1 Last time read locked in file btr0cur.c line 390 Last time write locked in file buf0buf.c line 1404 --Thread 1134643 has waited at btr0cur.c line 390 for 0.00 seconds the semaphore: S-lock on RW-latch at 92fa9b84 created in file buf0buf.c line 444 a writer (thread id 167960) has reserved it in mode exclusive number of readers 0, waiters flag 1 Last time read locked in file btr0cur.c line 390 Last time write locked in file buf0buf.c line 1404 --Thread 1069100 has waited at btr0cur.c line 390 for 0.00 seconds the semaphore: S-lock on RW-latch at 92b3c734 created in file buf0buf.c line 444 a writer (thread id 1294399) has reserved it in mode exclusive number of readers 0, waiters flag 1 Last time read locked in file btr0cur.c line 390 Last time write locked in file buf0buf.c line 1404 --Thread 1294399 has waited at btr0cur.c line 390 for 0.00 seconds the semaphore: S-lock on RW-latch at 92b3c734 created in file buf0buf.c line 444 a writer (thread id 1294399) has reserved it in mode exclusive number of readers 0, waiters flag 1 Last time read locked in file btr0cur.c line 390 Last time write locked in file buf0buf.c line 1404 --Thread 1282108 has waited at btr0cur.c line 390 for 0.00 seconds the semaphore: S-lock on RW-latch at 922d78f4 created in file buf0buf.c line 444 a writer (thread id 1282108) has reserved it in mode exclusive number of readers 0, waiters flag 1 Last time read locked in file btr0sea.c line 753 Last time write locked in file buf0buf.c line 1404 Mutex spin waits 96547444, rounds 309622046, OS waits 1589531 RW-shared spins 3471561, OS waits 1434935; RW-excl spins 1022533, OS waits 145621 TRANSACTIONS *** LOTS OF STUFF HERE *** FILE I/O I/O thread 0 state: waiting for i/o request (insert buffer thread) I/O thread 1 state: waiting for i/o request (log thread) I/O thread 2 state: doing file i/o (read thread) I/O thread 3 state: waiting for i/o request (write thread) Pending normal aio reads: 192, aio writes: 0, ibuf aio reads: 0, log i/o's: 0, sync i/o's: 0 Pending flushes (fsync) log: 0; buffer pool: 0 3135978 OS file reads, 80521 OS file writes, 41212 OS fsyncs 4 pending preads, 0 pending pwrites 223.89 reads/s, 72228 avg bytes/read, 1.00 writes/s, 1.00 fsyncs/s - INSERT BUFFER AND ADAPTIVE HASH INDEX - Ibuf for space 0: size 31, free list len 29, seg size 61, 110608 inserts, 100175 merged recs, 14569 merges Hash table size 4980539, used cells 665918, node heap has 702 buffer(s) 7813.59 hash searches/s, 3283.86 non-hash searches/s --- LOG --- Log sequence number 18 429778985 Log flushed up to 18 429778985 Last checkpoint at 18 429608118 0 pending log writes, 0 pending chkp writes 22237 log i/o's done, 2.00 log i/o's/second -- BUFFER POOL AND MEMORY -- Total memory allocated 1470181283; in additional pool allocated 9935488 Buffer pool size 76800 Free buffers 0 Database pages 76084 Modified db pages 168 Pending reads 131 Pending writes: LRU 0, flush list 0, single page 0 Pages read 16098598, created 12247, written 85799 1923.08 reads/s, 0.00 creates/s, 0.00 writes/s Buffer pool hit rate 977 / 1000 -- ROW OPERATIONS -- 8 queries inside InnoDB, 48 queries in queue Main thread process no. 1225, id 28680, state: sleeping Number of rows inserted 292454, updated 132038, deleted 139429, read 359279518 0.50 inserts/s, 0.50 updates/s, 1.00 deletes/s, 12631.68 reads/s END OF INNODB MONITOR OUTPUT my.cnf
Re: switch from gemini to innodb bottlnecks
Nihal, FILE I/O ... 223.89 reads/s, 72228 avg bytes/read -- BUFFER POOL AND MEMORY -- ... Pending reads 131 ... 1923.08 reads/s, 0.00 creates/s, 0.00 writes/s it is disk-read-bound. It is reading a whopping 1900 pages per second! That is 30 MB/s. Do you have many SELECT COUNT(*) FROM tablename queries? InnoDB scans the whole table to get the row count of a table. If the tables do not change often, and you run the SELECT COUNT(*) in the AUTOCOMMIT=1 mode, then the MySQL query cache will help. [mysqld] set-variable=query_cache_size=256M set-variable=query_cache_limit=2M set-variable=query_cache_type=1 In 4.1.1, the query cache works also in the AUTOCOMMIT=0 mode. Best regards, Heikki Tuuri Innobase Oy http://www.innodb.com Foreign keys, transactions, and row level locking for MySQL InnoDB Hot Backup - hot backup tool for InnoDB which also backs up MyISAM tables Order MySQL technical support from https://order.mysql.com/ - Original Message - From: Nihal [EMAIL PROTECTED] Newsgroups: mailing.database.myodbc Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 8:38 PM Subject: switch from gemini to innodb bottlnecks I've recently switched from GEMINI to INNODB, to be able to get continued support and upgrades of MySQL. I'm running into to some major performance issues. The section in the MySQL manual is not very thorough on optimizing INNODB. I'm getting two problems, either all my queries pile up, or a 'show processlist' shows 50 sleeping processes that should be hard at work, either way everything comes to a crawl. The database server is a dedicated 2CPU pIII 2.6Ghz, 2GB RAM, with a 14 hardrive (10k) Raid5 array. Pretty much every query uses indexed fields, so things should be fast, I get the impression that there is a locking issue going on, but as I understood it, INNDOB is supposed to do row level locking? I haven't had this problem with GEMINI in the past. Can anyone give me some improvement suggestions? = 031105 10:51:32 INNODB MONITOR OUTPUT = Per second averages calculated from the last 2 seconds -- SEMAPHORES -- OS WAIT ARRAY INFO: reservation count 3528797, signal count 2864755 --Thread 1105938 has waited at btr0cur.c line 390 for 1.00 seconds the semaphore: S-lock on RW-latch at 92b43f74 created in file buf0buf.c line 444 a writer (thread id 1105938) has reserved it in mode exclusive number of readers 0, waiters flag 1 Last time read locked in file btr0cur.c line 390 Last time write locked in file buf0buf.c line 1404 --Thread 1134643 has waited at btr0cur.c line 390 for 0.00 seconds the semaphore: S-lock on RW-latch at 92fa9b84 created in file buf0buf.c line 444 a writer (thread id 167960) has reserved it in mode exclusive number of readers 0, waiters flag 1 Last time read locked in file btr0cur.c line 390 Last time write locked in file buf0buf.c line 1404 --Thread 1069100 has waited at btr0cur.c line 390 for 0.00 seconds the semaphore: S-lock on RW-latch at 92b3c734 created in file buf0buf.c line 444 a writer (thread id 1294399) has reserved it in mode exclusive number of readers 0, waiters flag 1 Last time read locked in file btr0cur.c line 390 Last time write locked in file buf0buf.c line 1404 --Thread 1294399 has waited at btr0cur.c line 390 for 0.00 seconds the semaphore: S-lock on RW-latch at 92b3c734 created in file buf0buf.c line 444 a writer (thread id 1294399) has reserved it in mode exclusive number of readers 0, waiters flag 1 Last time read locked in file btr0cur.c line 390 Last time write locked in file buf0buf.c line 1404 --Thread 1282108 has waited at btr0cur.c line 390 for 0.00 seconds the semaphore: S-lock on RW-latch at 922d78f4 created in file buf0buf.c line 444 a writer (thread id 1282108) has reserved it in mode exclusive number of readers 0, waiters flag 1 Last time read locked in file btr0sea.c line 753 Last time write locked in file buf0buf.c line 1404 Mutex spin waits 96547444, rounds 309622046, OS waits 1589531 RW-shared spins 3471561, OS waits 1434935; RW-excl spins 1022533, OS waits 145621 TRANSACTIONS *** LOTS OF STUFF HERE *** FILE I/O I/O thread 0 state: waiting for i/o request (insert buffer thread) I/O thread 1 state: waiting for i/o request (log thread) I/O thread 2 state: doing file i/o (read thread) I/O thread 3 state: waiting for i/o request (write thread) Pending normal aio reads: 192, aio writes: 0, ibuf aio reads: 0, log i/o's: 0, sync i/o's: 0 Pending flushes (fsync) log: 0; buffer pool: 0 3135978 OS file reads, 80521 OS file writes, 41212 OS fsyncs 4 pending preads, 0 pending pwrites 223.89 reads/s, 72228 avg bytes/read, 1.00 writes/s, 1.00 fsyncs/s - INSERT BUFFER AND ADAPTIVE HASH INDEX - Ibuf for space 0: size
Re: gemini
On Fri, Oct 24, 2003 at 05:04:28PM +1000, Chris wrote: They gave up on it eh? Was that more because of the legal problems that happened, or due to BDB and InnoDB continuing to improve and provide better solutions? Leagal issues, probably. -- Jeremy D. Zawodny | Perl, Web, MySQL, Linux Magazine, Yahoo! [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://jeremy.zawodny.com/ -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: gemini
On Tue, Oct 21, 2003 at 05:22:07PM -0400, Gabriel Ricard wrote: Someone recently asked about Gemini tables on this list and it got me curious about what ever happened to that technology... NuSphere still seems to exist, and they still sell their PHPEd product along with the NuSphere Technology Platform which appears to contain a build of MySQL. Did they ever GPL Gemini? Or did they just take it away? I think they gave up on it. -- Jeremy D. Zawodny | Perl, Web, MySQL, Linux Magazine, Yahoo! [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://jeremy.zawodny.com/ MySQL 4.0.15-Yahoo-SMP: up 40 days, processed 1,527,399,757 queries (439/sec. avg) -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: GEMINI
Hi! Thanks to the god of multiversioned databases, creator of InnoDB and all-round good human being Heikki, I can tell you the following things with confidence: 1. InnoDB is the fastest disk-based transactional database engine on the planet, period. No ifs, no buts, no conditions at all. 2. InnoDB is solid. Unless you do things like have two mysqld processes access the same table space over a Sun NFS setup at the same time, things just work. 3. Hot backups are an option you can acquire, while still paying much less than you would for any other DB. Admittedly, I know very little about Gemini other than what's in some old versions of the MySQL documentation (anyone want to point me in the direction of some solid info on what made this table type stand out?). However, from what I can tell, Gemini was closer to MS SQL and DB2, in that it depended on row locks for almost every operation. InnoDB doesn't depend on row locks anywhere near as much (thanks to Oracle-style consistant reads) and the lack of phantoms is quite nice. Foreign keys are also nice. If performance is a serious issue, I'd recommend you set yourself up a test box, start dumping data into it and throwing some queries at it (perhaps by setting up replication from the current Gemini box to an InnoDB setup?). Hope my ramblings are of some use! We currently host 20 GB of random garbage in InnoDB tables, and the database takes up less time than my Samba installation! Regards, Chris Nihal wrote: Can anyone tell me what happened to GEMINI? We've been customers of MySQL for a while and about two years ago started using Nusphere's version to take advantage of their row level locking/ACID transaction safe table type GEMINI. Things went well for a while but one day I came back for help and poof, Nusphere has moved all support to Russia, then a couple weeks later no more support exists. I understand this was due to a violation on their part of the GPL. So here I am stuck with 80GB's of GEMINI data and an aging version of MySQL prone to crash every couple of months. Does anyone know, are the GEMINI developers from Nusphere somewhere else legally continuing this development? If not can someone give me some migration suggestions? I've looked at InnoDB some, but am worried, will it provide equal performance to GEMINI? Also to migrate this I have found one copy of MySQL, version 4.00beta, that has support for both GEMINI and INNODB, will using this version cause problems for me? Thanks, Nihal -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
gemini
Someone recently asked about Gemini tables on this list and it got me curious about what ever happened to that technology... NuSphere still seems to exist, and they still sell their PHPEd product along with the NuSphere Technology Platform which appears to contain a build of MySQL. Did they ever GPL Gemini? Or did they just take it away? Not that it matters a whole lot since InnoDB has continuously improved in Gemini's absence... Anyone know what the story is? - Gabriel -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GEMINI
Can anyone tell me what happened to GEMINI? We've been customers of MySQL for a while and about two years ago started using Nusphere's version to take advantage of their row level locking/ACID transaction safe table type GEMINI. Things went well for a while but one day I came back for help and poof, Nusphere has moved all support to Russia, then a couple weeks later no more support exists. I understand this was due to a violation on their part of the GPL. So here I am stuck with 80GB's of GEMINI data and an aging version of MySQL prone to crash every couple of months. Does anyone know, are the GEMINI developers from Nusphere somewhere else legally continuing this development? If not can someone give me some migration suggestions? I've looked at InnoDB some, but am worried, will it provide equal performance to GEMINI? Also to migrate this I have found one copy of MySQL, version 4.00beta, that has support for both GEMINI and INNODB, will using this version cause problems for me? Thanks, Nihal
Gemini Table
I would like to know what the exactly diference the ACID nomenclature. I read the mysql documentation, but it´s a little difficult to understand between C and D. Does anybody can explain. Tks. Greetings Alexander sql, query ___ Yahoo! Encontros O lugar certo para encontrar a sua alma gêmea. http://br.encontros.yahoo.com/ - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
gemini/acid or innodb ?
Hello, I found an other table type for transaction : The simplicity of ACID transactions is especially important in a distributed database environment where the transactions are being made simultaneously. Learn more about the Gemini table type that supports ACID Transactions. Find in nusphere site. Is gemini better than innodb ? How can i get gemini table type ? Is gemini a solution of nusphere (corp.) and Innodb a solution of mysql (corp.) ? How beeing objective ? Thanks. ___ Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en français ! Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Gemini Tables and NuSphere Update
I am a new MySQL user, so forgive my stupidity for asking the following question (perhaps taboo). What is the latest on NuSphere vs MySQL AB? What about Gemini. I have searched everywhere for info, but can't seem to find anything after November of last year. I have serious needs for transaction processing, but don't know which way to turn. Should I undertake using NuSphere's (supposedly stable) Gemini tables. There seems to be a lack of info on these tables now. I am trying to get a grasp on what happened to this MYSQL AB vs NuSphere deal, but all of the posts about it seem to have vanished. In addition, my first impression of Gemini was not good as I did some simulated crash test and corrupted the tables without much trouble. Perhaps it was unrelated. But it is worth further investigation. Or should I look at the InnoDB tables (which are still considered beta). Any opinions? Craig sql,query - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Gemini Tables and NuSphere Update
On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 10:17:52AM -0600, Scalper wrote: I am a new MySQL user, so forgive my stupidity for asking the following question (perhaps taboo). What is the latest on NuSphere vs MySQL AB? What about Gemini. I have searched everywhere for info, but can't seem to find anything after November of last year. They're in the midst of lawsuits and cannot discuss it. Thus, you'll see little if any public comment about it. Or should I look at the InnoDB tables (which are still considered beta). Any opinions? InnoDB is in pretty heavy use. Give it a try and see how it works for you. Jeremy -- Jeremy D. Zawodny, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Technical Yahoo - Yahoo Finance Desk: (408) 349-7878 Fax: (408) 349-5454 Cell: (408) 685-5936 MySQL 3.23.47-max: up 14 days, processed 454,496,815 queries (372/sec. avg) - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Gemini Tables and NuSphere Update
Hi! Or should I look at the InnoDB tables (which are still considered beta). InnoDB tables are classified as gamma by Innobase Oy and MySQL AB. The text on the MySQL-Max download page is lagging behind (says beta), but to balance it, on the front page MySQL AB classifies MySQL-Max as stable :). A December quickpoll at the MySQL website showed InnoDB market share at 10 %, BDB 3 %, MyISAM 80 %, ISAM 5 %, of 3000 people who responded. Mytrix, Inc. is maybe the largest MySQL database site in the world (if someone has more than 1 TB data, please step forward), and they use InnoDB tables. See http://www.innodb.com/userstories.html. Best regards, Heikki Tuuri Innobase Oy --- InnoDB - transactions, row level locking, and foreign key support for MySQL See http://www.innodb.com, download MySQL-Max from http://www.mysql.com - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Gemini compile error
While compiling MySQL+Gemini-3.23.41 i received the following error:
gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I.. -I../incl -I../msgs -O3 -DDBUG_OFF -c
dsmindex.c
In file included from dsmindex.c:39:
/usr/include/string.h:245: parse error before `('
/usr/include/string.h:245: warning: conflicting types for built-in
function `memset'
/usr/include/string.h:245: parse error before `int'
make[4]: *** [dsmindex.o] Error 1
make[4]: Leaving directory
`/usr/local/src/Apache/mysql+gemini-3.23.41/gemini/api'
System is RedHat 7.1, with their GCC 2.96-85
While I'm on the subject, does BDB tables provide the same type of
locking that Gemini does? Is there any reason to favor Gemini over BDB?
--
H | Life is the art of drawing without an eraser. - John Gardner
+
Ashley M. Kirchner mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] . 303.442.6410 x130
Director of Internet Operations / SysAdmin. 800.441.3873 x130
Photo Craft Laboratories, Inc.. 3550 Arapahoe Ave, #6
http://www.pcraft.com . . .. Boulder, CO 80303, U.S.A.
-
Before posting, please check:
http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual)
http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive)
To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Gemini compile error
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, 22 Nov 2001, Ashley M. Kirchner wrote: While compiling MySQL+Gemini-3.23.41 i received the following error: System is RedHat 7.1, with their GCC 2.96-85 Same here, althogh the binary version starts up fine. While I'm on the subject, does BDB tables provide the same type of locking that Gemini does? Is there any reason to favor Gemini over BDB? While on the subject: has anyone seen a WORKING gemini table? I've tried 2 different redhat systes, and 3 different debian systems, and always got the same result: starts up fine, dies in about 15 seconds, safe_mysqld tries to bring it up, so it recoveres from the crash, repeats the whole thing a few times, and then no longer recovers. Max uptime, starting with a new database, ending with an unrecoverable one, has never exceeded 30 minutes. So I'm trying Innodb tables now. Initial tests (the ones that caused gemini to die in less than a minute) have been runing for about 4 days in a row now, and it's very stable. I have yet to test what it does with 50-60k users at the same time. (That's what is causing me problems with myisam table locks now.) I need to modiy a lot of code to use row-level locks. I'll let you know about the result. :) BDB as far as I know does not support row-level locking, it has page-level locks. Attila ... Actual newspaper headline, 1/17/77: Cold Wave Linked to Temperatures - --- Public key: http://civ.hu/attila.asc -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE7/LqgDeyfLhmXxQwRAkXyAJ9yj0BLVxqQrrH9UYkTWXX18/hrAQCgiSqX 7CMbRMZz2qhiy7y/fnwqyKw= =NsLE -END PGP SIGNATURE- - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Gemini compile error
At 9:43 AM +0100 11/22/01, Attila Beno wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, 22 Nov 2001, Ashley M. Kirchner wrote: While compiling MySQL+Gemini-3.23.41 i received the following error: System is RedHat 7.1, with their GCC 2.96-85 Same here, althogh the binary version starts up fine. While I'm on the subject, does BDB tables provide the same type of locking that Gemini does? Is there any reason to favor Gemini over BDB? While on the subject: has anyone seen a WORKING gemini table? I've tried 2 different redhat systes, and 3 different debian systems, and always got the same result: starts up fine, dies in about 15 seconds, safe_mysqld tries to bring it up, so it recoveres from the crash, repeats the whole thing a few times, and then no longer recovers. I've not had any problems with GEMINI tables, though I've seen something like what you describe with BDB tables. RedHat 7.0, gcc 2.96-85. - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Gemini compile error
Hi Ashley, - Original Message - From: Ashley M. Kirchner [EMAIL PROTECTED] While compiling MySQL+Gemini-3.23.41 i received the following error: [...] System is RedHat 7.1, with their GCC 2.96-85 No idea about Gemini, but we do have an advisory against using gcc 2.96 on RedHat to compile MySQL, it appears to produce faulty code. We currently use gcc 2.95 to create our binary distribution. While I'm on the subject, does BDB tables provide the same type of locking that Gemini does? Is there any reason to favor Gemini over BDB? BDB locks on page level. You'll want to have a look at the InnoDB tables, which provide row-level locking and many other features. See http://www.mysql.com/doc/I/n/InnoDB.html If you're just starting out, I would recommend you grab the latest version from www.mysql.com (3.23.44 or 4.0.0 at the time of writing this message, but 3.23.45 will be out soon). Also, only compile from source if you really need to, otherwise it is recommended to use the binaries as provided by MySQL AB which have been compiled with optimal settings, and tested with our test suite before release. Regards, Arjen. -- MySQL Training Worldwide, http://www.mysql.com/training/ __ ___ ___ __ / |/ /_ __/ __/ __ \/ /Mr. Arjen G. Lentz [EMAIL PROTECTED] / /|_/ / // /\ \/ /_/ / /__ MySQL AB, Technical Writer /_/ /_/\_, /___/\___\_\___/ Brisbane, QLD Australia ___/ www.mysql.com - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: GEMINI Table Type
On Tue, Sep 11, 2001 at 03:29:00PM +0200, Henning Schroeder wrote: At 11:03 11.09.01, you wrote: does MYSQL.COM has a table type same as GEMINI ( GEMINI yes. MySQL contains support for BDB and InnoDB tables, that are transaction-safe. I don´t want to provoke any anger here, maybe i´m still too new on the list. But actually, i´m a bit sick of the current state of the gemini dispute. I have the feeling that you can´t even say the g-word loud here From the description on the mysql.org website, gemini tables look pretty good. But that´s maybe because they are not so easy on describing the problems with their tables as mysql.com on their website (with innodb and bdb tables). Also, it looks just like marketing talk so i refuse to form an opinion from that. I beta tested Gemini before things got interesting. The technology *is* good, but it's also rather controversial (as you've noticed). So could somebody more enlightened than me please fix us up on the technological benefits/drawbacks on these table types? Gemini provides crash recovery, record-level locking, and high levels of concurrency (as their documentation probably says). It really does work--or did when I last tried it. Also, I would very much love to hear about these legal problems. mysql.com still says But the products they [NuSphere] have shipped are and continue to be in GPL violation.. Nusphere gives you an Gemini GPL Source download. One of the two must be wrong :-)) Let's just say that it's rather complex. The mail archives for this list already contain a fair amount of information on the topic. And there's a lot of information that you simply won't get until the legal stuff is all over. I was about to type something to the effect please shake hands, stop sueing each other and live happily. but i see that i´m not clued enough about the situation to have a real opinion. I think that everyone involved would like it to be that simple and easy, but it's clearly not. Is somebody? Yes, but most of the folks who know the details really can't discuss them. Jeremy -- Jeremy D. Zawodny, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Technical Yahoo - Yahoo Finance Desk: (408) 349-7878 Fax: (408) 349-5454 Cell: (408) 685-5936 MySQL 3.23.41-max: up 6 days, processed 132,326,734 queries (248/sec. avg) - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: GEMINI Table Type
Hi, does MYSQL.COM has a table type same as GEMINI ( GEMINI does not complies with GPL according to what I read) that support the ACID PROPERTIES ( TRANSACTIONS ) (MyIsam, Inodb ?) ... yes. MySQL contains support for BDB and InnoDB tables, that are transaction-safe. if you are downloading a binary distribution, you should download the MySQL-Max binary, that has BDB/InnoDB compiled in (the default MySQL does not). Rgds, Indrek -- For technical support contracts, goto https://order.mysql.com/ __ ___ ___ __ / |/ /_ __/ __/ __ \/ /Indrek Siitan [EMAIL PROTECTED] / /|_/ / // /\ \/ /_/ / /__ MySQL AB, The Web Guru /_/ /_/\_, /___/\___\_\___/ Tallinn, Estonia ___/ www.mysql.com - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: GEMINI Table Type
At 11:03 11.09.01, you wrote: does MYSQL.COM has a table type same as GEMINI ( GEMINI yes. MySQL contains support for BDB and InnoDB tables, that are transaction-safe. I don´t want to provoke any anger here, maybe i´m still too new on the list. But actually, i´m a bit sick of the current state of the gemini dispute. I have the feeling that you can´t even say the g-word loud here From the description on the mysql.org website, gemini tables look pretty good. But that´s maybe because they are not so easy on describing the problems with their tables as mysql.com on their website (with innodb and bdb tables). Also, it looks just like marketing talk so i refuse to form an opinion from that. So could somebody more enlightened than me please fix us up on the technological benefits/drawbacks on these table types? Also, I would very much love to hear about these legal problems. mysql.com still says But the products they [NuSphere] have shipped are and continue to be in GPL violation.. Nusphere gives you an Gemini GPL Source download. One of the two must be wrong :-)) I was about to type something to the effect please shake hands, stop sueing each other and live happily. but i see that i´m not clued enough about the situation to have a real opinion. Is somebody? Henning - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
GEMINI Table Type
Hi : First of all I've test for a short period MYSQL, I think is great ,,, recently I was navigating MYSQL.COM and I found and read about the dispute with MYSQL.ORG I enter the site to see what it was ... I notice they promote a type of table name GEMINI ... that support the ACID properties ... What I understand is that MYSQL.COM MYSQL.ORG, but does MYSQL.COM has a table type same as GEMINI ( GEMINI does not complies with GPL according to what I read) that support the ACID PROPERTIES ( TRANSACTIONS ) (MyIsam, Inodb ?) ... Sorry if someone already post this Question, and sounds like a echo to all of you, but I am really interest in using MYSQL to develop a project and I am evaluating it ... Thanks a lot - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: GEMINI Table Type
Hello. On Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 09:20:55AM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] What I understand is that MYSQL.COM MYSQL.ORG, but does MYSQL.COM has a table type same as GEMINI ( GEMINI does not complies with GPL according to what I read) that support the ACID PROPERTIES ( TRANSACTIONS ) (MyIsam, Inodb ?) ... MyISAM does not (fully), InnoDB and BDB do support ACID properties. Have a look at the documentation in the manual to learn more about these table types. Bye, Benjamin. PS: Why did you try mail this to the announce-list? It certainly doesn't belong there. - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: GEMINI Table Type
At 9:20 AM -0600 9/10/01, ROGGER ALEXIS VASQUEZ MARTINEZ wrote: Hi : First of all I've test for a short period MYSQL, I think is great ,,, recently I was navigating MYSQL.COM and I found and read about the dispute with MYSQL.ORG I enter the site to see what it was ... I notice they promote a type of table name GEMINI ... that support the ACID properties ... What I understand is that MYSQL.COM MYSQL.ORG, but Correct. does MYSQL.COM has a table type same as GEMINI ( GEMINI does not complies with GPL according to what I read) I think you may be referring to material that predates Gemini's release under GPL. that support the ACID PROPERTIES ( TRANSACTIONS ) (MyIsam, Inodb ?) ... The distributions available at mysql.com do not include code for the Gemini table type. The MySQL+Gemini distributions at mysql.org do. The distributions from both sites also support ISAM, MyISAM, BDB, and InnoDB table types. You may have to compile from source with the appropriate configure flags to enable support for the table types you want to evaluate. Sorry if someone already post this Question, and sounds like a echo to all of you, but I am really interest in using MYSQL to develop a project and I am evaluating it ... Thanks a lot -- Paul DuBois, [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Gemini Problems
I've compiled MySQL 3.23.39 with Gemini support. The compile was error free although the 'make test' skipped the Gemini tests for some reason. In the mysqld.err log from the test directory I see this message: 00:18:15 MSGS_DIR tag failed -1 --- I went ahead and installed it. 'Show Variables' confirms that gemini is DISABLED. The docs indicate that this means support is compiled in, but has been disabled by '--skip-gemini'. This isn't the case. My configure options were: -- ./configure \ --prefix=/usr \ --localstatedir=/home/mysql.db \ --with-innodb \ --with-gemini \ --enable-thread-safe-client \ --enable-assembler \ --with-unix-socket-path=/var/lib/mysql/mysql.sock \ --with-mysqld-user=mysql \ --without-debug \ --with-client-ldflags=-all-static \ --with-mysqld-ldflags=-all-static \ --with-extra-charsets=none My startup options were: --skip-networking --skip-name-resolve \ --default-table-type=gemini --gemini-unbuffered-io \ --transaction-isolation=READ-UNCOMMITTED And finally, my.cnf contains: - gemini-recovery=FULL set-variable= gemini_buffer_cache=128M set-variable= gemini_io_threads=4 set-variable= gemini_connection_limit=200 Any help or pointers greatly appreciated :) Paul http://dbforums.com - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Gemini Problems
On Thu, Aug 09, 2001 at 11:07:13PM -0400, Paul wrote:
I've compiled MySQL 3.23.39 with Gemini support. The compile was error
free although the 'make test' skipped the Gemini tests for some reason. In
the mysqld.err log from the test directory I see this message:
00:18:15 MSGS_DIR tag failed -1
---
I went ahead and installed it. 'Show Variables' confirms that gemini is
DISABLED. The docs indicate that this means support is compiled in, but
has been disabled by '--skip-gemini'. This isn't the case.
Hi,
I cannot offer a solution but I am having the same problem.
I compiled mysql with debugging and traced it with gdb,
here's the offending code in ha_gemini.cc in the
gemini_init function.
fn_format(pmsgsfile, GEM_MSGS_FILE, language, .db, 2 | 4);
rc = dsmContextSetString(pfirstContext, DSM_TAGDB_MSGS_FILE,
strlen(pmsgsfile), (TEXT *)pmsgsfile);
if( rc != 0 )
{
gemini_msg(pfirstContext, MSGS_DIR tag failed %l, rc);
goto badret;
}
If gemini_init fails, mysqld sets gemini to disabled. It
seems to do this if any table type fails on initialization.
Now what this piece of code is trying to do I have no idea.
Shane
--
Shane Wegner: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.cm.nu/~shane/
PGP: 1024D/FFE3035D
A0ED DAC4 77EC D674 5487
5B5C 4F89 9A4E FFE3 035D
-
Before posting, please check:
http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual)
http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive)
To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: mysql+gemini compile errors
Brian P. Millett writes: Hello, SunOS shaka 5.8 Generic_108529-08 i86pc i386 i86pc gcc version 2.95.3 20010315 (release) I'm trying to compile mysql+gemini-3.23.39 on a x86 Solaris 8 box. I get the following error which has me completly confussed: cut -- Brian Millett Enterprise Consulting Group Shifts in paradigms (314) 205-9030 often cause nose bleeds. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Greg Glenn You can try two things. First , checking that your compiler is well installed and that it produces x86 binaries and second, try disabling usage of assembly with MySQL configure. -- Regards, __ ___ ___ __ / |/ /_ __/ __/ __ \/ /Mr. Sinisa Milivojevic [EMAIL PROTECTED] / /|_/ / // /\ \/ /_/ / /__ MySQL AB, FullTime Developer /_/ /_/\_, /___/\___\_\___/ Larnaca, Cyprus ___/ www.mysql.com - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: mysql+gemini compile errors
Hello: The file db/tstset.cc holds all the different versions of how to do an atomic test+set of a bit. If you are on an Intel box, you should be using the section of code that uses the xchg instruction. The configure script should be setting a #define for the machine. (check config.h). This #define along with a $MACHINE environment variable are used to get the correct tstset() call out of db/tstset.cc. Hope this helps MikeF -- -- Mike Furgal- The Database Guy http://www.nusphere.com- Delivering Enhanced MySQL -- Hello, SunOS shaka 5.8 Generic_108529-08 i86pc i386 i86pc gcc version 2.95.3 20010315 (release) I'm trying to compile mysql+gemini-3.23.39 on a x86 Solaris 8 box. I get the following error which has me completly confussed: ctstset: Compile tstset.cc -- tstset.[c|s] -- tstset.o Assembler: tstset.s, line 43 : Illegal mnemonic [snip] -- Brian Millett Enterprise Consulting Group Shifts in paradigms (314) 205-9030 often cause nose bleeds. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Greg Glenn - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
mysql+gemini compile errors
Hello, SunOS shaka 5.8 Generic_108529-08 i86pc i386 i86pc gcc version 2.95.3 20010315 (release) I'm trying to compile mysql+gemini-3.23.39 on a x86 Solaris 8 box. I get the following error which has me completly confussed: ctstset: Compile tstset.cc -- tstset.[c|s] -- tstset.o Assembler: tstset.s, line 43 : Illegal mnemonic tstset.s, line 43 : Syntax error tstset.s, line 43 : Illegal mnemonic tstset.s, line 44 : Illegal mnemonic tstset.s, line 44 : Syntax error tstset.s, line 45 : Illegal mnemonic tstset.s, line 45 : Syntax error tstset.s, line 45 : Illegal mnemonic tstset.s, line 47 : Illegal mnemonic tstset.s, line 47 : Syntax error tstset.s, line 47 : Illegal register: o0 tstset.s, line 47 : Illegal register: o1 tstset.s, line 47 : Illegal mnemonic tstset.s, line 47 : Illegal mnemonic tstset.s, line 48 : Syntax error tstset.s, line 48 : Illegal mnemonic tstset.s, line 48 : Illegal mnemonic tstset.s, line 48 : Illegal mnemonic tstset.s, line 48 : Illegal register: o0 tstset.s, line 48 : Illegal register: o1 tstset.s, line 49 : Syntax error tstset.s, line 49 : Illegal mnemonic tstset.s, line 49 : Illegal mnemonic tstset.s, line 49 : Illegal register: o0 tstset.s, line 50 : Illegal mnemonic tstset.s, line 50 : Syntax error tstset.s, line 50 : Illegal register: o1 tstset.s, line 50 : Illegal mnemonic tstset.s, line 50 : Illegal mnemonic tstset.s, line 50 : Illegal mnemonic tstset.s, line 50 : Illegal mnemonic Too many errors - Goodbye -rw-r--r-- 1 bpm develop 2252 Jul 16 17:53 tstset.c -rwxr-xr-x 1 bpm develop32426 Jul 16 18:00 tstset.cc -rw-r--r-- 1 bpm develop 897 Aug 1 14:53 tstset.s rm -f libdb.a ar cru libdb.a bkcheck.o bkcrashtest.o bkio.o bkiolk.o bkiotop.o bklog.o bkopen.o bkrec.o bkrepl.o bksubs.o bmapw.o bmbuf.o cx.o cxaux.o cxblock.o cxcompact.o cxdo.o cxfil.o cxgen.o cxkill.o cxky.o cxkyut.o cxmove.o cxnxt.o cxtag.o cxundo.o cxvsi.o db.o dbarea.o dbblob.o dbclose.o dbindex.o dblang.o dblksch.o dbobject.o dbopen.o dbquiet.o dbrecord.o dbtable.o dbuser.o dbwdog.o geminifromkey.o geminikey.o keysvc.o keyut.o ky.o kyut.o latctl.o lkmu.o lkrecd.o om.o omundo.o rec.o recformt.o recget.o recput.o rlai.o rlaiovl.o rlaoff.o rlcl.o rlmem.o rlnote.o rlrej.o rlrw.o rlset.o rltl.o rm.o rmdoundo.o semadm.o semmgr.o seqdundo.o seqgen.o shm.o shmatt.o shmcr.o shmdel.o shmpid.o shmptoq.o shmsiz.o stm.o tm.o tmdoundo.o tstset.o ar: cannot open tstset.o No such file or directory ar: tstset.o not found gmake[4]: *** [libdb.a] Error 1 gmake[4]: Leaving directory `/opt/src/mysql+gemini-3.23.39/gemini/db' gmake[3]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 gmake[3]: Leaving directory `/opt/src/mysql+gemini-3.23.39/gemini' gmake[2]: *** [all-recursive-am] Error 2 gmake[2]: Leaving directory `/opt/src/mysql+gemini-3.23.39/gemini' gmake[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 gmake[1]: Leaving directory `/opt/src/mysql+gemini-3.23.39' gmake: *** [all-recursive-am] Error 2 shaka: -- Brian Millett Enterprise Consulting Group Shifts in paradigms (314) 205-9030 often cause nose bleeds. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Greg Glenn - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
mysql 3.23.40-Solaris8-Gcc3.0 error compiling with gemini
I'm trying to intall mysql 3.23.40 on Solaris 8 ( GCC 3.0 ) but I'm having a little difficulty. Whenever it gets to the gemini directory it errors out with the following: /usr/local/bin/gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I.. -I../incl -I../msgs-O3 -DDBUG_OFF -O6 -DHAVE_CURSES_H -I/export/home6/temp/mysql-3.23.40/include -DHAVE_RWLOCK_T -c tmdoundo.c ../ctstset ctstset: Compile tstset.cc -- tstset.[c|s] -- tstset.o tstset.s: Assembler messages: tstset.s:43: Error: Unknown segment type tstset.s:43: Error: Rest of line ignored. First ignored character is `'. tstset.s:63: Error: Unknown segment type tstset.s:63: Error: Rest of line ignored. First ignored character is `'. -rw-r--r-- 1 root other 2252 Jul 27 13:39 tstset.c -rwxr-xr-x 1 root other 32426 Jul 27 13:39 tstset.cc -rw-r--r-- 1 root other897 Jul 30 08:42 tstset.s rm -f libdb.a ar cru libdb.a bkcheck.o bkcrashtest.o bkio.o bkiolk.o bkiotop.o bklog.o bkopen.o bkrec.o bkrepl.o bksubs.o bmapw.o bmbuf.o cx.o cxaux.o cxblock.o cxcompact.o cxdo.o cxfil.o cxgen.o cxkill.o cxky.o cxkyut.o cxmove.o cxnxt.o cxtag.o cxundo.o cxvsi.o db.o dbarea.o dbblob.o dbclose.o dbindex.o dblang.o dblksch.o dbobject.o dbopen.o dbquiet.o dbrecord.o dbtable.o dbuser.o dbwdog.o geminifromkey.o geminikey.o keysvc.o keyut.o ky.o kyut.o latctl.o lkmu.o lkrecd.o om.o omundo.o rec.o recformt.o recget.o recput.o rlai.o rlaiovl.o rlaoff.o rlcl.o rlmem.o rlnote.o rlrej.o rlrw.o rlset.o rltl.o rm.o rmdoundo.o semadm.o semmgr.o seqdundo.o seqgen.o shm.o shmatt.o shmcr.o shmdel.o shmpid.o shmptoq.o shmsiz.o stm.o tm.o tmdoundo.o tstset.o ar: tstset.o: No such file or directory make[4]: *** [libdb.a] Error 1 make[4]: Leaving directory `/export/home6/temp/mysql-3.23.40/gemini/db' make[3]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 make[3]: Leaving directory `/export/home6/temp/mysql-3.23.40/gemini' make[2]: *** [all-recursive-am] Error 2 make[2]: Leaving directory `/export/home6/temp/mysql-3.23.40/gemini' make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory `/export/home6/temp/mysql-3.23.40' make: *** [all-recursive-am] Error 2 My config looks like this: ./configure \ --enable-static \ --disable-shared \ --with-raid \ --with-libwrap \ --without-debug \ --with-mysqld-ldflags=-all-static \ --without-docs \ --without-bench \ --with-charset=latin1 \ --with-berkeley-db \ --with-innodb \ --with-gemini Anyone know how to fix this? Thanks, -Mark - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: mysql 3.23.40-Solaris8-Gcc3.0 error compiling with gemini
Faine, Mark writes: I'm trying to intall mysql 3.23.40 on Solaris 8 ( GCC 3.0 ) but I'm having a little difficulty. Whenever it gets to the gemini directory it errors out with the following: /usr/local/bin/gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I.. -I../incl -I../msgs-O3 -DDBUG_OFF -O6 -DHAVE_CURSES_H -I/export/home6/temp/mysql-3.23.40/include -DHAVE_RWLOCK_T -c tmdoundo.c ../ctstset ctstset: Compile tstset.cc -- tstset.[c|s] -- tstset.o tstset.s: Assembler messages: tstset.s:43: Error: Unknown segment type tstset.s:43: Error: Rest of line ignored. First ignored character is `'. tstset.s:63: Error: Unknown segment type tstset.s:63: Error: Rest of line ignored. First ignored character is `'. -rw-r--r-- 1 root other 2252 Jul 27 13:39 tstset.c -rwxr-xr-x 1 root other 32426 Jul 27 13:39 tstset.cc -rw-r--r-- 1 root other897 Jul 30 08:42 tstset.s Thanks, -Mark You could try disabling assembler, which is MySQL default on SPARC and x86. If that does not help, inform GCC people and try using InnoDB instead. -- Regards, __ ___ ___ __ / |/ /_ __/ __/ __ \/ /Mr. Sinisa Milivojevic [EMAIL PROTECTED] / /|_/ / // /\ \/ /_/ / /__ MySQL AB, FullTime Developer /_/ /_/\_, /___/\___\_\___/ Larnaca, Cyprus ___/ www.mysql.com - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: gemini tables in mysql
On Fri, Jul 20, 2001 at 01:19:57PM +0300, Sinisa Milivojevic wrote: Yes, in 3.23.41 source tarball only. We will not put Gemini tables in our binaries due to several reasons of which stability is just one. Does this mean they'll re-appear in the manual as well? -- Jeremy D. Zawodny, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Technical Yahoo - Yahoo Finance Desk: (408) 349-7878 Fax: (408) 349-5454 Cell: (408) 685-5936 -- NEW MySQL 3.23.29: up 35 days, processed 269,908,904 queries (89/sec. avg) - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: gemini tables in mysql
Jeremy Zawodny writes: On Fri, Jul 20, 2001 at 01:19:57PM +0300, Sinisa Milivojevic wrote: Does this mean they'll re-appear in the manual as well? -- Jeremy D. Zawodny, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Technical Yahoo - Yahoo Finance Desk: (408) 349-7878 Fax: (408) 349-5454 Cell: (408) 685-5936 -- NEW MySQL 3.23.29: up 35 days, processed 269,908,904 queries (89/sec. avg) I truly do not know. This entire issue is still quite open. -- Regards, __ ___ ___ __ / |/ /_ __/ __/ __ \/ /Mr. Sinisa Milivojevic [EMAIL PROTECTED] / /|_/ / // /\ \/ /_/ / /__ MySQL AB, FullTime Developer /_/ /_/\_, /___/\___\_\___/ Larnaca, Cyprus ___/ www.mysql.com - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: gemini tables in mysql
Pete Kuczynski writes: Hi, since Nusphere release the source code for gemini yesterday I believe it was, I was wondering if Mysql AB was going to incorporate it into a future release if it's database. I realise in light of recent .org events Pete -- ___ Pete Kuczynski Sr. Field Engineer DHL Airways Inc. Infrastructure Technology Services (773)-462-9758 24/7 Helpdesk 1-800-434-5767 Yes, in 3.23.41 source tarball only. We will not put Gemini tables in our binaries due to several reasons of which stability is just one. -- Regards, __ ___ ___ __ / |/ /_ __/ __/ __ \/ /Mr. Sinisa Milivojevic [EMAIL PROTECTED] / /|_/ / // /\ \/ /_/ / /__ MySQL AB, FullTime Developer /_/ /_/\_, /___/\___\_\___/ Larnaca, Cyprus ___/ www.mysql.com - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
string errors compiling mysql+gemini-3.23.39 on Athlon running Linux 2.4.3-12
-- Description: I get errors when I try to compile the distribution. The first one happens in the gemini tree and is caused by a prototype mismatch between the bzero() defined in strings.h and the one defined in the mysql source. Apparently, the one on my system takes a void* for the first argument and the mysql source expects char*. I got around this by lying in config.h and saying I don't have string_h or strings_h and that I don't have bzero. Now gemini compiles fine. But, the problems continue. The next problem occurs in the client tree. I guess since I said previously that I don' t have the strings.h file, I'm leaving strlen undeclared and client/sql_string.cc balks at this. How-To-Repeat: I'm not sure what to put here because this happened even the first time I tried to compile. I'm running RedHat and it came with mysql rpm's but I want to set the localstatedir to be something else and it didn't seem possible with a binary distribution unless I use symlinks. So actually if you know how to do this please enlighten me and I won't need to compile. Fix: BTW I used mysqlbug but I can't send mail from the machine where it's installed so I have to paste things here. Sorry if the format isn't exactly right. I'm not on the mysql list so if you happen to know how to solve my problem please cc to me at [EMAIL PROTECTED] Submitter-Id: Originator: Jonathan [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: MySQL support: none Synopsis: multiple errors involving string functions when compiling mysql+gemini 3.23.39 on Athlon running Linux 2.4.3-12 Severity: critical (for me) Priority: medium (I'd really rather not settle for the default location of localstatedir) Category: mysql Class: sw-bug or configuration problem Release: mysql-3.23.39 (Source distribution) (according to mysqlbug) Environment: Ok, I'm pasting here the output of mysqlbug but I have some beef with this: #1, in Compilation info it does NOT show the vars that I set when I compiled. #2, in Configure command it does NOT show the settings that I specified I know that what I specified was used because I could see it in make's output. I don't know why mysqlbug didn't detect the right stuff. So, after mysqlbug's output I put a little line of === and then pasted what I used. System: Linux beer 2.4.3-12 #7 Thu Jul 5 15:07:25 EDT 2001 i686 unknown Architecture: i686 Some paths: /usr/bin/perl /usr/bin/make /usr/bin/gmake /usr/bin/gcc /usr/bin/cc GCC: Reading specs from /usr/lib/gcc-lib/i386-redhat-linux/2.96/specs gcc version 2.96 2731 (Red Hat Linux 7.1 2.96-85) Compilation info: CC='gcc' CFLAGS='' CXX='gcc' CXXFLAGS='' LDFLAGS='' LIBC: lrwxrwxrwx1 root root 13 Jun 23 2000 /lib/libc.so.6 - libc-2.2.2.so -rwxr-xr-x1 root root 1236396 Apr 6 17:58 /lib/libc-2.2.2.so -rw-r--r--1 root root 26350254 Apr 6 15:27 /usr/lib/libc.a -rw-r--r--1 root root 178 Apr 6 15:27 /usr/lib/libc.so Configure command: ./configure --with-unix-socket-path=/var/tmp/mysql.sock --with-low-memory\ --with-mit-threads=yes --without-perl --enable-thread-safe-client --with-be rkeley-db --with-\ innodb Compilation info: CC=gcc CFLAGS=-O3 -DDBUG_OFF CXX=gcc CXXFLAGS=-O3 -DDBUG_OFF -fno-implicit-templates -felide-constructors -fno-e xceptions -fno-rtti Configure command: ./configure --prefix=/usr/local/mysql --with-mysqld-user=mysql --localstated ir=/system4/database/mysql/data --with-gemini=gemini --enable-assembler --wi th-mysqld-ldflags=-all-static --enable-thread-safe-client Additional info: In file included from mysql.cc:49: sql_string.h: In method `String::String (const char *)': sql_string.h:39: `strlen' undeclared (first use this function) sql_string.h:39: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in.) In file included from ../readline/chardefs.h:37, from ../readline/keymaps.h:31, from ../readline/readline.h:36, from mysql.cc:83: /usr/include/string.h: At top level: /usr/include/string.h:218: `size_t strlen (const char *)' used prior to declaration /usr/include/string.h:242: parse error before `)' /usr/include/string.h:242: parse error before `)' /usr/include/string.h:242: parse error before `)' /usr/include/string.h:242: warning: `memcpy' initialized and declared `extern' /usr/include/string.h:242: variable or field `memcpy' declared void /usr/include/string.h:242: `int memcpy' redeclared as different kind of symbol /usr/include/string.h:38: previous declaration of `void *memcpy (void *, const void *, unsigned int)' /usr/include/string.h:242: initializer list being treated as compound expression make: *** [mysql.o] Error 1 -- By the way if I have done something wrong in reporting this and it's about to be ignored, please let me know so I can fix whatever and get some help. I've been using the binaries on another machine for over a year
Re: string errors compiling mysql+gemini-3.23.39 on Athlon running Linux 2.4.3-12
On Fri, Jul 20, 2001 at 06:44:29AM -0400, Jonathan Buhacoff wrote: -- Description: I get errors when I try to compile the distribution. The first one happens in the gemini tree and is caused by a prototype mismatch between the bzero() defined in strings.h and the one defined in the mysql source. Apparently, the one on my system takes a void* for the first argument and the mysql source expects char*. I got around this by lying in config.h and saying I don't have string_h or strings_h and that I don't have bzero. Now gemini compiles fine. But, the problems continue. The next problem occurs in the client tree. I guess since I said previously that I don' t have the strings.h file, I'm leaving strlen undeclared and client/sql_string.cc balks at this. Hi, I encountered the same thing but my fix was different. Try going into gemini/incl/pscsys.h and look for this: +#ifndef bzero #define bzero(s,n) memset((s),(int)0,(n)) #endif Just pop that bit out so it doesn't bother defining it. Assuming you have bzero which you appear to. Put config.h back the way it was and all should work fine. Shane -- Shane Wegner: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.cm.nu/~shane/ PGP: 1024D/FFE3035D A0ED DAC4 77EC D674 5487 5B5C 4F89 9A4E FFE3 035D - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
gemini tables in mysql
Hi, since Nusphere release the source code for gemini yesterday I believe it was, I was wondering if Mysql AB was going to incorporate it into a future release if it's database. I realise in light of recent .org events Pete -- ___ Pete Kuczynski Sr. Field Engineer DHL Airways Inc. Infrastructure Technology Services (773)-462-9758 24/7 Helpdesk 1-800-434-5767 - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: InnoDB, BDB, and Gemini
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 11:39:32AM -0700, Eric J. Schwertfeger wrote: Aside from what's in the manual, I have a little to offer. I just got InnoDB working yesterday, so take what I have to say with a grain of salt. And I'll add a bit, too. :-) Gemini: Currently in Beta testing, with no source code available. The code *was* in the MySQL bitkeeper repository at one point. I thought it still was. You might be able to get in on the beta program. I did, I figured we could test it using Linux emulation on FreeBSD. Boy, was I wrong. Not blaming NuSphere, however. I was just quite surprized when the remote install hung. After going into the area with the server, I found that some part of the install had triggered a halt on the server. Yuck. Yes, I was also hoping for FreeBSD support. But NuSphere needs to see significant demand for it. On the other hand, once it's released and the source code is there, making it work on FreeBSD might not be a huge chore. It already runs on Solaris, Linux, and Windows, right? :-) InnoDB: Some little voice inside my head is saying it's too good to be true. I wrote a program to take about a months worth of our live data (750K records) and stuff it into a database with a perl script via DBI. InnoDB ran about 50% faster than MyISAM, and about 18 *TIMES* faster than PostgreSQL. I wasn't expecting InnoDB to be faster than MyISAM, since InnoDB is transactional and MyISAM isn't, which is one of the reasons everyone uses to explain why (and when) MySQL is faster than PostgreSQL. InnoDB is pretty impressive, isn't it?! A few other differences: Gemini doesn't support BLOBs, and InnoDB is limited to 8000 byte BLOBs. Gemini is limited to 2G tables, and I'm not sure about InnoDB. You can have multiple InnoDB files, but I don't know if a table has to reside entirely in one file. Gemini's BLOB support was supposedly just implemented. I'm told it'll be part of the next beta cycle (roughly a week fro now, or so?). Gemini also has smaller maximum key sizes than MyISAM tables. This was a big issue for us, but they're working on removing that limitation. And the table size limits aren't supposed to be an issue much longer, either. Come to think of it, I know the recovery log had that limit, but I didn't think/know the tables did. I thought that was purely an OS issue--as it is with MyISAM. Jeremy -- Jeremy D. Zawodny, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Technical Yahoo - Yahoo Finance Desk: (408) 349-7878Fax: (408) 349-5454Cell: (408) 439-9951 MySQL 3.23.29: up 130 days, processed 803,952,600 queries (71/sec. avg) - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
MYISAM v.s. GEMINI Tables
Goodday to you all For those that are interested, I have managed to get my GEMINI tables working successfully, and changed one of my reports to use the MYSQL tables instead of my original MSACCESS ones. Had a couple problems with the initial altering of some tables from MYISAM to GEMINI, but managed to do some work arounds and get it right eventually. I set up a test, got four tables, they are linked in pairs as the set's contain different info. I am using a inner join statement, joining on a indexed field. (select * from shcoslin inner join shcosmas on shcoslin.batch=shcosmas.batch) This is not my exact statement as there is also a where clause, but just to give you some details. Once I have completed filling my grid with the above statement, I then do it again but on two different tables. My timer runs from the beginning to end, i.e. the time taken includes adding the neccessary rows to the grid, and so it is not only the execute part. My table details are: shcosmas = 3766 records shcoslin = 78432 records shinvmas = 6057 records shinvlin = 20314 records the two shcos tables are fixed length, about 200 characters the two shinv tables are dynamic, and mostly about 200 characters as well This test was not for inserts, purely select statement as per above. My inserts I am not too worried about as these are mostly spread out and never more than 50 inserts consequetivelly, normally max 5. Therefore I am more worried with the reporting hence this test. I ran each test 6 times on each setup, I know this is not a huge amount of testing but all 6 showed the same times bar one second, so I figured 50 will prove the same results. Results:- MYISAM TYPE About 6000 records selected and inserted into the grid, then sorted. 47.5 seconds About 13000 records selected and inserted into the grid, then sorted. 145.5 seconds Then once changed to GEMINI format About 6000 records selected and inserted into the grid, then sorted. 21.0 seconds About 13000 records selected and inserted into the grid, then sorted. 100.5 seconds As said above, these times include the time taken to add the rows using a while, wend statement to a grid in my application. The timer is at the exact same point, and is logged into a file therefore there is no chance of me starting/stopping a clock watch at the wrong time, etc etc. I am running this on a PII600 Laptop, running 256MB Ramm and Windows 2000 Professional using Nusphere's MYSQL for Windows which has the gemini table type. So, the above results makes for VERY interesting reading. I know the GEMINI table is still in Beta Testing and so with that, does come some complications which I hope will be sorted out once the official release, but now that it is running I will need to see if I have any other problems. All my data was imported from a MSACCESS database, and found that I had to import the table definition first, change the type and add the neccessary indexes, and then import the data otherwise the mysqld-opt crashed occassionally. Regards Warren ~ Warren van der Merwe Software Director PRT Trading (Pty) Ltd t/a RedTie Durban, South Africa Cell (+27-83) 262-9163 Office (+27-31) 767-0249 - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: MYISAM v.s. GEMINI Tables
Bonjour Warren, What about InnoDB tables ? Could you change the TYPE to INNODB and run the same test ? This would be great to compare MYISAM, GEMINI and INNODB. Regards, Alex. WvdM Goodday to you all WvdM For those that are interested, I have managed to get my GEMINI tables WvdM working successfully, and changed one of my reports to use the MYSQL tables WvdM instead of my original MSACCESS ones. Had a couple problems with the initial WvdM altering of some tables from MYISAM to GEMINI, but managed to do some work WvdM arounds and get it right eventually. I set up a test, got four tables, they WvdM are linked in pairs as the set's contain different info. I am using a inner WvdM join statement, joining on a indexed field. (select * from shcoslin inner WvdM join shcosmas on shcoslin.batch=shcosmas.batch) This is not my exact WvdM statement as there is also a where clause, but just to give you some WvdM details. Once I have completed filling my grid with the above statement, I WvdM then do it again but on two different tables. My timer runs from the WvdM beginning to end, i.e. the time taken includes adding the neccessary rows to WvdM the grid, and so it is not only the execute part. WvdM My table details are: WvdM shcosmas = 3766 records WvdM shcoslin = 78432 records WvdM shinvmas = 6057 records WvdM shinvlin = 20314 records WvdM the two shcos tables are fixed length, about 200 characters WvdM the two shinv tables are dynamic, and mostly about 200 characters as well WvdM This test was not for inserts, purely select statement as per above. My WvdM inserts I am not too worried about as these are mostly spread out and never WvdM more than 50 inserts consequetivelly, normally max 5. Therefore I am more WvdM worried with the reporting hence this test. WvdM I ran each test 6 times on each setup, I know this is not a huge amount of WvdM testing but all 6 showed the same times bar one second, so I figured 50 will WvdM prove the same results. WvdM Results:- WvdM MYISAM TYPE WvdM About 6000 records selected and inserted into the grid, then sorted. WvdM 47.5 seconds WvdM About 13000 records selected and inserted into the grid, then sorted. WvdM 145.5 seconds WvdM Then once changed to GEMINI format WvdM About 6000 records selected and inserted into the grid, then sorted. WvdM 21.0 seconds WvdM About 13000 records selected and inserted into the grid, then sorted. WvdM 100.5 seconds WvdM As said above, these times include the time taken to add the rows using a WvdM while, wend statement to a grid in my application. The timer is at the exact WvdM same point, and is logged into a file therefore there is no chance of me WvdM starting/stopping a clock watch at the wrong time, etc etc. WvdM I am running this on a PII600 Laptop, running 256MB Ramm and Windows 2000 WvdM Professional using Nusphere's MYSQL for Windows which has the gemini table WvdM type. WvdM So, the above results makes for VERY interesting reading. I know the GEMINI WvdM table is still in Beta Testing and so with that, does come some WvdM complications which I hope will be sorted out once the official release, but WvdM now that it is running I will need to see if I have any other problems. WvdM All my data was imported from a MSACCESS database, and found that I had to WvdM import the table definition first, change the type and add the neccessary WvdM indexes, and then import the data otherwise the mysqld-opt crashed WvdM occassionally. WvdM Regards WvdM Warren WvdM ~ WvdM Warren van der Merwe WvdM Software Director WvdM PRT Trading (Pty) Ltd t/a RedTie WvdM Durban, South Africa WvdM Cell (+27-83) 262-9163 WvdM Office (+27-31) 767-0249 - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: MYISAM v.s. GEMINI Tables
On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 03:45:50PM +0200, Warren van der Merwe wrote: [major snip] As said above, these times include the time taken to add the rows using a while, wend statement to a grid in my application. The timer is at the exact same point, and is logged into a file therefore there is no chance of me starting/stopping a clock watch at the wrong time, etc etc. Just for the record, I've seen similarly good performance in my Gemini testing. But I seem to be more skilled at breaking it than using it. :-( Jeremy -- Jeremy D. Zawodny, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Technical Yahoo - Yahoo Finance Desk: (408) 349-7878Fax: (408) 349-5454Cell: (408) 439-9951 MySQL 3.23.29: up 129 days, processed 797,384,393 queries (71/sec. avg) - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
InnoDB, BDB, and Gemini
I have re-read the appropriate manual sections several times, trying to decide what is the best option for my database table types. I am using 3.32.37 on Linux, and am torn between InnoDB, BDB, and Gemini table types. Transaction handling is very important for my application (commit, rollback, etc.). I am leaning toward InnoDB at this point but was wondering if anyone could offer any information, other than what is in the manual, regarding the pros and cons of these table types. TIA Kevin McBrearty ATG Automation Technologies Group Ltd. - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: InnoDB, BDB, and Gemini
InnoDB definately provides more features that BDB, and is probably going to be faster, Gemini isn't available yet. BDB might be more complete/stable. So I'd say Gemini is out of the picture unless you are looking longer term. I'd do some testing with both we found some bugs in the 3.23.37 distribution with regard to BDB, Monty sais they are fix in .38 Kevin McBrearty wrote: I have re-read the appropriate manual sections several times, trying to decide what is the best option for my database table types. I am using 3.32.37 on Linux, and am torn between InnoDB, BDB, and Gemini table types. Transaction handling is very important for my application (commit, rollback, etc.). I am leaning toward InnoDB at this point but was wondering if anyone could offer any information, other than what is in the manual, regarding the pros and cons of these table types. TIA Kevin McBrearty ATG Automation Technologies Group Ltd. - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
RE: InnoDB, BDB, and Gemini
Goodday to you all Gemini tables are busy being beta tested, and therefore are available. I personally use them and so far so good. I really love having row level locking in MYSQL, and it works like a dream. contact www.nusphere.com for more info. There are currently running with 3.23.36 Enjoy Warren ~ Warren van der Merwe Software Director PRT Trading (Pty) Ltd t/a RedTie Durban, South Africa Cell (+27-83) 262-9163 Office (+27-31) 767-0249 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]On Behalf Of Steve Ruby Sent: 11 May 2001 06:10 To: Kevin McBrearty; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: InnoDB, BDB, and Gemini InnoDB definately provides more features that BDB, and is probably going to be faster, Gemini isn't available yet. BDB might be more complete/stable. So I'd say Gemini is out of the picture unless you are looking longer term. I'd do some testing with both we found some bugs in the 3.23.37 distribution with regard to BDB, Monty sais they are fix in .38 Kevin McBrearty wrote: I have re-read the appropriate manual sections several times, trying to decide what is the best option for my database table types. I am using 3.32.37 on Linux, and am torn between InnoDB, BDB, and Gemini table types. Transaction handling is very important for my application (commit, rollback, etc.). I am leaning toward InnoDB at this point but was wondering if anyone could offer any information, other than what is in the manual, regarding the pros and cons of these table types. TIA Kevin McBrearty ATG Automation Technologies Group Ltd. - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
RE: InnoDB, BDB, and Gemini
Have you noticed a significant speed decline using Gemini tables? RH -Original Message- From: Warren van der Merwe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 11, 2001 11:31 AM To: 'Steve Ruby'; 'Kevin McBrearty'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: InnoDB, BDB, and Gemini Goodday to you all Gemini tables are busy being beta tested, and therefore are available. I personally use them and so far so good. I really love having row level locking in MYSQL, and it works like a dream. contact www.nusphere.com for more info. There are currently running with 3.23.36 Enjoy Warren ~ Warren van der Merwe Software Director PRT Trading (Pty) Ltd t/a RedTie Durban, South Africa Cell (+27-83) 262-9163 Office (+27-31) 767-0249 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]On Behalf Of Steve Ruby Sent: 11 May 2001 06:10 To: Kevin McBrearty; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: InnoDB, BDB, and Gemini InnoDB definately provides more features that BDB, and is probably going to be faster, Gemini isn't available yet. BDB might be more complete/stable. So I'd say Gemini is out of the picture unless you are looking longer term. I'd do some testing with both we found some bugs in the 3.23.37 distribution with regard to BDB, Monty sais they are fix in .38 Kevin McBrearty wrote: I have re-read the appropriate manual sections several times, trying to decide what is the best option for my database table types. I am using 3.32.37 on Linux, and am torn between InnoDB, BDB, and Gemini table types. Transaction handling is very important for my application (commit, rollback, etc.). I am leaning toward InnoDB at this point but was wondering if anyone could offer any information, other than what is in the manual, regarding the pros and cons of these table types. TIA Kevin McBrearty ATG Automation Technologies Group Ltd. - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
RE: InnoDB, BDB, and Gemini
In all honesty, I have personally not done any testing of Gemini v.s. other types as yet. I am busy converting my app from MS Access to MYSQL, once this is finished I will then be in a better position to answer this as I can test it. Regards Warren ~ Warren van der Merwe Software Director PRT Trading (Pty) Ltd t/a RedTie Durban, South Africa Cell (+27-83) 262-9163 Office (+27-31) 767-0249 -Original Message- From: Robert Henkel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 11 May 2001 06:37 To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'; 'Steve Ruby'; 'Kevin McBrearty'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: InnoDB, BDB, and Gemini Have you noticed a significant speed decline using Gemini tables? RH -Original Message- From: Warren van der Merwe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 11, 2001 11:31 AM To: 'Steve Ruby'; 'Kevin McBrearty'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: InnoDB, BDB, and Gemini Goodday to you all Gemini tables are busy being beta tested, and therefore are available. I personally use them and so far so good. I really love having row level locking in MYSQL, and it works like a dream. contact www.nusphere.com for more info. There are currently running with 3.23.36 Enjoy Warren ~ Warren van der Merwe Software Director PRT Trading (Pty) Ltd t/a RedTie Durban, South Africa Cell (+27-83) 262-9163 Office (+27-31) 767-0249 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]On Behalf Of Steve Ruby Sent: 11 May 2001 06:10 To: Kevin McBrearty; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: InnoDB, BDB, and Gemini InnoDB definately provides more features that BDB, and is probably going to be faster, Gemini isn't available yet. BDB might be more complete/stable. So I'd say Gemini is out of the picture unless you are looking longer term. I'd do some testing with both we found some bugs in the 3.23.37 distribution with regard to BDB, Monty sais they are fix in .38 Kevin McBrearty wrote: I have re-read the appropriate manual sections several times, trying to decide what is the best option for my database table types. I am using 3.32.37 on Linux, and am torn between InnoDB, BDB, and Gemini table types. Transaction handling is very important for my application (commit, rollback, etc.). I am leaning toward InnoDB at this point but was wondering if anyone could offer any information, other than what is in the manual, regarding the pros and cons of these table types. TIA Kevin McBrearty ATG Automation Technologies Group Ltd. - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: InnoDB, BDB, and Gemini
On Fri, 11 May 2001, Kevin McBrearty wrote: I have re-read the appropriate manual sections several times, trying to decide what is the best option for my database table types. I am using 3.32.37 on Linux, and am torn between InnoDB, BDB, and Gemini table types. Transaction handling is very important for my application (commit, rollback, etc.). I am leaning toward InnoDB at this point but was wondering if anyone could offer any information, other than what is in the manual, regarding the pros and cons of these table types. Aside from what's in the manual, I have a little to offer. I just got InnoDB working yesterday, so take what I have to say with a grain of salt. BDB: I've worked with Berkley DB files (ver 1.8 and 2.? directly from C, not through MySQL) for several years at work, and they're rather fast for small databases, but the speed (for mixed inserts/lookups) drops off fast when you start getting past 10K records. By the time you've reached 100K records, you're running at 1/10th the speed you were at 1K records. For the tests I was doing, BDB was the one MySQL table type that ran slower than PostgreSQL (7.1.1) for 250K inserts, and dramatically slower than all others for selects that didn't involve an index. I didn't even run the rest of the tests. Gemini: Currently in Beta testing, with no source code available. You might be able to get in on the beta program. I did, I figured we could test it using Linux emulation on FreeBSD. Boy, was I wrong. Not blaming NuSphere, however. I was just quite surprized when the remote install hung. After going into the area with the server, I found that some part of the install had triggered a halt on the server. InnoDB: Some little voice inside my head is saying it's too good to be true. I wrote a program to take about a months worth of our live data (750K records) and stuff it into a database with a perl script via DBI. InnoDB ran about 50% faster than MyISAM, and about 18 *TIMES* faster than PostgreSQL. I wasn't expecting InnoDB to be faster than MyISAM, since InnoDB is transactional and MyISAM isn't, which is one of the reasons everyone uses to explain why (and when) MySQL is faster than PostgreSQL. I'm not claiming that is a fair comparison, as I'm doing more comparisions, and won't decide until I've crammed an entire years worth of data through both databases, including all necessary deletions/purges/lookups, etc, and it could be that the problem with PostgreSQL was the Pg DBI interface. A few other differences: Gemini doesn't support BLOBs, and InnoDB is limited to 8000 byte BLOBs. Gemini is limited to 2G tables, and I'm not sure about InnoDB. You can have multiple InnoDB files, but I don't know if a table has to reside entirely in one file. - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Comparison of BDB/Gemini/Innobase tables?
Can someone point me to a comparison of the three different transaction-based table types in MySQL? It is unclear from the on-line documentation what the benefits/features/limitations are for each of these types. Thanks Ray -- --- Raymond Cote, President Appropriate Solutions, Inc. www.AppropriateSolutions.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] 603.924.6079(v) POB 458, Peterborough, NH 03458603.924.8668(f) - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Date for Gemini project
Hi, Does anyone have an idea of the date when the developments of Gemini project will be integrated into MySQL ? Will it be integrated in the MySQL 4.0 version ? Will it be integrated in the standard MySQL sources without changing the license agreement ? I read that this project resulted in the integration of the kernel of a successful commercial databas. Could we already have some idea about performance against MyISAM tables ? Thanks Patrick Fiche - Prologue Software (France) Software Engineer Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet : http://www.prologue-software.com - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
gemini
Where can we find more information about gemini and when it will be done exactly (date)? -- -Spinlock EmpireQuest Creator http://www.empirequest.com - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
