MySQL converts MYSQL_TYPE_LONG to float before storing
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/c-api-prepared-statement-datatypes.html
?
Where does it say that?
All in all, datatypes are datatypes, despite platform.
With regards,
Martijn Tonies
Upscene Productions
http://www.upscene.com
Dow
euvent facilement
être sujets à la manipulation, nous ne pouvons accepter aucune responsabilité
pour le contenu fourni.
> Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2009 11:30:32 -0400
> Subject: Re: AMD64
> From: alex.kat...@gmail.com
> To: m.ton...@upscene.com
> CC: mysql@lists.mysql.com
>
> On
On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 11:17 AM, Martijn Tonies wrote:
> Alex,
>
> Please respond to the list instead of my personal address.
sorry I thought i was.
>
>
>
> Nevertheless, if MYSQL_TYPE_LONG is the datatype for a table field,
> it would always -have- to be the same size, cause different clients c
Alex,
Please respond to the list instead of my personal address.
Nevertheless, if MYSQL_TYPE_LONG is the datatype for a table field,
it would always -have- to be the same size, cause different clients can
connect (if not being embedded), wouldn't it?
With regards,
Martijn Tonies
Upscene Produc
What is the size of MYSQL_TYPE_LONG in a 64bit machine? I am trying to
save
pointers. If this type is 4 bytes on a 32bit machine and 8 bytes on a
64bit
machine will make it much easier.
Ehm, wouldn't that like, totally fail if -saved- by a 64bit machine
and -read- by
a 32bit machine if tha
Hi,
What is the size of MYSQL_TYPE_LONG in a 64bit machine? I am trying to save
pointers. If this type is 4 bytes on a 32bit machine and 8 bytes on a 64bit
machine will make it much easier.
Thanks,
-Alex
Hi
I am just wondering if anyone is running MySQL Database on a fairly busy
Website running on FreeBSD AMD64 7-stabble with PHP+Apache?
I am going to build a server for couple of websites having traffic 5 million
per month...
Any comments?
--
Thanks!
BR / vj
Have you checked this?
http://www.slideshare.net/sim303/7020-preview/
http://www.freebsd.org/features.html
On Jan 22, 2008 4:05 AM, Mikhail Berman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> Is anyone has experience running MySQL 5.0.41 on FreeBSD 7.0-RC1 AMD64?
>
> I
Hi everyone,
Is anyone has experience running MySQL 5.0.41 on FreeBSD 7.0-RC1 AMD64?
If you do would you be able to comment on MySQL performance, possible
advantages and problems?
Regards,
--
Mikhail Berman
ke it was some problem with mysql's binaries on AMD64,
since after upgrading to 5.0.19 it looks to be working again.
It just apears weird to me that only this server would crash mysql :|
The other AMD64 which has the same config, same kernel, same libc6,
didn't crash. Though that mysql wa
On Tue, Mar 28, 2006 at 10:12:58AM +0200, Sander Smeenk wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I have a dual Opteron 250 system with 4GB memory running Debian with
> MySQL version 5.0.18 and unfortunately it keeps crashing at (somewhat)
> random intervals with messages like:
>
> | Mar 14 00:32:59 zwart mysqld[29820
x27;s still
running, and i can still connect to it, but anything from select
statements to showing tables makes the session hang indefinitely.
Eventually causing mysqld to refuse connections, and the only solution
is to kill -9 the mysqld process which leaves corrupt tables...
I have another AMD64 runni
je killen wrote:
Is there a version of MySQL for FreeBSD v6.0 AMD64 compatible? I
haven't seen one explicitly on the MySQL site
and I don't know if it is a good idea to try and compile and install
from source code for this machine.
Install mysql from FreeBSD ports collection. I'
Is there a version of MySQL for FreeBSD v6.0 AMD64 compatible? I
haven't seen one explicitly on the MySQL site
and I don't know if it is a good idea to try and compile and install
from source code for this machine.
Thanks
JK
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list arch
SEND-PR: -*- send-pr -*-
SEND-PR: Lines starting with `SEND-PR' will be removed automatically, as
SEND-PR: will all comments (text enclosed in `<' and `>').
SEND-PR:
From: root
To: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: [50 character or so descriptive subject here (for reference)]
>Description:
i try
It appears that mysqld won't start if the setting for key_buffer
is more than 2GB.
Maybe you've also hit the quirks of memory management and malloc, just as
we've posted a while ago in http://lists.mysql.com/mysql/186930 ?
It seems to have been a simple issue of not unlimiting the datasize
>
> Maybe you've also hit the quirks of memory management and malloc, just as
> we've posted a while ago in http://lists.mysql.com/mysql/186930 ?
An interesting thread, but I'm on NetBSD, not Linux. But it's some place
to start looking around, I guess.
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list arc
- Original Message -
From: "Chris Kantarjiev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Monday, September 19, 2005 9:06 PM
Subject: very large key_buffer on amd64?
> We're starting to use mysql (4.0.25) on an amd64 machine (running
> NetBSD-3). One of the reasons for doi
We're starting to use mysql (4.0.25) on an amd64 machine (running
NetBSD-3). One of the reasons for doing this is to use much more
RAM - we tend to thrash the key_buffer on i386 because one of our
indexes is 10GB in size (the table is 15GB).
It appears that mysqld won't start if the s
stions, maybe you guys can help:
1) pthreads is safer, but LinuxThreads is way faster?
2) What's the best io scheduler for 20GB MyISAM DB? I'm currently using
cfq.
3) Does anyone have any tips on running MySQL+AMD64+Linux?
Thanks a lot!
Best regards,
RV
We fought this exact setup
What's the best io scheduler for 20GB MyISAM DB? I'm currently using
> cfq.
> 3) Does anyone have any tips on running MySQL+AMD64+Linux?
>
> Thanks a lot!
>
> Best regards,
> RV
>
>
--
For technical support contracts, goto https://order
uys can help:
1) pthreads is safer, but LinuxThreads is way faster?
2) What's the best io scheduler for 20GB MyISAM DB? I'm currently using
cfq.
3) Does anyone have any tips on running MySQL+AMD64+Linux?
Thanks a lot!
Best regards,
RV
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives
On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 10:37:43PM -0700, mike wrote:
> I'm compiling my mysql server from source.
>
> I have started noticing this as of 4.1.10 - in fact, I was running
> 4.1.12 and it's changed the LinuxThreads detection (since LT does not
> exist on amd64) - and 4.1
I'm compiling my mysql server from source.
I have started noticing this as of 4.1.10 - in fact, I was running
4.1.12 and it's changed the LinuxThreads detection (since LT does not
exist on amd64) - and 4.1.12 kept locking up after only a few minutes
of uptime consistently.
Once I fi
On Thu, 2005-06-16 at 21:06, Richard Dale wrote:
> > So we have recently started stress testing Mysql on an Opteron dual
> CPU
> > machine running Ubuntu Hoary. We are using the 64-bit GCC
> > 4.0.24-standard binary from mysql. The stress test that I'm currently
> > running on it involves ins
> > running on it involves inserting a large database (from a mysqldump)
> > ...
>
> Which linux kernel are you running?
2.6.10, specifically the ubuntu compile:
2.6.10-5-amd64-k8-smp
> Why not consider MySQL 4.1? It's now a stable production release.
Unfortunate
Hello.
MySQL on 64-bit AMD rises lots of questions. There is an Opteron HOWTO
at:
http://hashmysql.org/index.php?title=Opteron_HOWTO
I can't give any advice except sending to the list the output of SHOW
STATUS and SHOW PROCESSLIST statements performed when MySQL uses a lot
of memory.
> So we have recently started stress testing Mysql on an Opteron dual
CPU
> machine running Ubuntu Hoary. We are using the 64-bit GCC
> 4.0.24-standard binary from mysql. The stress test that I'm currently
> running on it involves inserting a large database (from a mysqldump)
> ...
Which l
So we have recently started stress testing Mysql on an Opteron dual CPU
machine running Ubuntu Hoary. We are using the 64-bit GCC
4.0.24-standard binary from mysql. The stress test that I'm currently
running on it involves inserting a large database (from a mysqldump)
from three separate
Problem: INSERT queries hang on amd64.
This looks a lot like Don MacAskill's bugreport in
http://bugs.mysql.com/bug.php?id=3483
I've just upgraded from 4.1.9 to 4.1.10 on a dual opteron with 8G ram,
running Debian 3.1. Also tried 4.0.23 last week, but that had the same
problems. Ke
.
Greg
Donny Simonton wrote:
I know this may be strange, but have you turned on innodb on the box? Even
if don't use it? I have 8 amd64 boxes and have never experienced this
problem you are talking about. They range from single proc to quad proc.
Never this problem but all of them have i
I know this may be strange, but have you turned on innodb on the box? Even
if don't use it? I have 8 amd64 boxes and have never experienced this
problem you are talking about. They range from single proc to quad proc.
Never this problem but all of them have innodb turned on.
Turn it o
On Wed, Feb 16, 2005 at 12:41:04PM +0100, Michel Buijsman wrote:
> My problem: INSERT queries hang on amd64.
Sorry about the multiple mails, mysql.com's mailinglist software
does annoying things with the wrong adresses...
--
Michel Buijsmantty.nl -- 2de
Problem: INSERT queries hang on amd64.
This looks a lot like Don MacAskill's bugreport in
http://bugs.mysql.com/bug.php?id=3483
I've just upgraded from 4.1.9 to 4.1.10 on a dual opteron with 8G ram,
running Debian 3.1. Also tried 4.0.23 last week, but that had the same
problems. Ke
My problem: INSERT queries hang on amd64.
This looks a lot like Don MacAskill's bugreport in
http://bugs.mysql.com/bug.php?id=3483
Which is listed as closed, but the bug is apparently still there
so maybe it should be reopened...
I've just upgraded from 4.1.9 to 4.1.10 (binary)
It looks like the default thread stack is not large enough for MySQL 4.1
on Linux running on AMD64.
With NPTL, the database quickly crashed after a few hours of heavy load
(segv).
Without NTPL, I believed it wasn't the case. But after one week mysqld
process were stuck in a strange
First, here's where they are:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] /]# find / -name libmysql*
/usr/lib64/libmysqlclient_r.so.14
/usr/lib64/libmysqlclient.so.14.0.0
/usr/lib64/libmysqlclient.so.14
/usr/lib64/libmysqlclient_r.so
/usr/lib64/mysql/libmysqlclient.la
/usr/lib64/mysql/libmysqlclient_r.la
/usr/lib64/mysql/li
).
Cheers,
Mark Steele
Implementation Director
CDT Inc.
-Original Message-
From: Lynn Bender [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: November 30, 2004 2:23 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: MySQL support for AMD64
I just received a box with the following specs:
Dual AMD64
8G ram
Two 3ware 2.4 ter
an Vance Pattishall http://www.friendster.com
> -Original Message-
> From: Donny Simonton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 12:04 PM
> To: 'Steve Poirier'; 'Lynn Bender'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: MySQL support for A
Hey,
I haven't used AMD64's, but we're running our production on a machine
with a 3ware 9508 running RAID10 with RHES 3. It's a beautiful setup.
The 3ware cards are an excellent choice, but as other posts say, use
RAID 10. If possible put your InnoDB logs onto a seperate array
I've got 3 amd64 machines running mysql. One with 32 gigs of memory and 2
with 16gigs. All of them are quad 848's. We use fedora core 2 on all of
our boxes.
2 of the boxes are pushing over 3000 queries per second. And one is over 4k
per second.
Personally, I have about 30 mysql
ing gentoo compiled from scratch (stage 1)
100% stability around 1000 queries / second
_
Steve
> -Original Message-
> From: Lynn Bender [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: November 30, 2004 2:23 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: MySQL supp
I don't have your configuration but I do have 2 servers running with
3ware controllers (800 or so megs in RAID 5 on each). They are stable
and performance is good. I don't run MySQL on these however. I also have
an AMD64 box running Fedora/AMD64/MySQL and everything is stable. My
AM
Lynn,
- Original Message -
From: "Lynn Bender" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: mailing.database.myodbc
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 9:22 PM
Subject: MySQL support for AMD64
I just received a box with the following specs:
Dual AMD64
8G ram
Two 3ware 2.4 terabyte R
ar. Anyway
(BI hope that you may find the info useful.
(B
(BBTW I am not running anything near Terabyte operations.
(B
(B
(BBest regards
(B
(BNils Valentin
(BTokyo/ Japan
(B
(B
(B
(B
(B
(B
(B> I just received a box with the following specs:
(B>
(B> Dual AMD64
(B> 8G ram
(
I just received a box with the following specs:
Dual AMD64
8G ram
Two 3ware 2.4 terabyte RAID 5 arrays.
My company has been using Redhat for most of its production machines.
1. Does anyone have any success/horror stories running MySQL 4.0.x
on RHES 3/ AMD64?
2. Does anyone have alternate
I recently migrated a myisam database to a dual processor AMD Opteron
(see specs below) host and found that tables would sporadically lock and
not release and so all subsequent inserts would be blocked. In this
state, I was unable to nicely restart the server. It would simply give
up. Repairing
A heads-up and a call for advice for anyone compiling from source on
Linux amd64:
The latest Debian amd64 "unstable" upgrade of libc6-dev to version
2.3.2.ds1-17 broke compiling MySQL 4.0.21 from source using gcc-3.4.
(Also breaks similarly with the default gcc for this platform,
ently our company has purchased a dual amd64 opteron machine for mysql
> > server purpose.
> > It seems that there are not many os choices for us.
> >
> > Here is the list of OS that we are going to test (in listed order):
> > - debian (amd64)
> > - fedora2 (am
2004 12:39, bad corn wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Recently our company has purchased a dual amd64 opteron machine for mysql
> server purpose.
> It seems that there are not many os choices for us.
>
> Here is the list of OS that we are going to test (in listed order):
> - debian (am
Hi guys,
We have a problem with Dual AMD64 Opteron/MySQL 4.0.18/Mandrake 10 for a
very high volume site. We are evaluating the performance on our new server
AMD64 and it seems it's slow compared to Dual Xeon/MySQL 4.0.15/RedHat8 and
Dual Xeon/MySQL 4.0.18/Mandrake 10.
And it seems ther
Pete Harlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> No. I've forgot to tell that the -Max binary is linked dynamically
>> because it uses SSL.
>
> Is there a reason the SSL libraries can't also be linked statically?
There was some reasons. Afair, MySQL is not the only software which could not
be staticall
"mc" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here are the results from my installation... in case you may find them
> useful :)
So it seems that 64bit binaries are also dynamically linked...:(
--
For technical support contracts, goto https://order.mysql.com/?ref=ensita
This email is sponsored by Ensi
On Fri, Jul 30, 2004 at 11:46:02AM -0500, Pete Harlan wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 29, 2004 at 06:26:23PM +0300, Egor Egorov wrote:
> ...
> > No. I've forgot to tell that the -Max binary is linked dynamically
> > because it uses SSL.
>
> Is there a reason the SSL libraries can't also be linked statically?
On Thu, Jul 29, 2004 at 06:26:23PM +0300, Egor Egorov wrote:
...
> No. I've forgot to tell that the -Max binary is linked dynamically
> because it uses SSL.
Is there a reason the SSL libraries can't also be linked statically?
Do you recommend against running the -Max binary, because it doesn't
us
[snip]
> No. I've forgot to tell that the -Max binary is linked dynamically because
> it uses
> SSL.
Here are the results from my installation... in case you may find them
useful :)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] root]# file
mysql-standard-4.0.20-unknown-linux-x86_64/bin/mysqld
mysql-standard-4.0.20-unknown-
this (from a 32bit installation)
>
> neon:/usr/local/mysql# ldd bin/mysqld
>not a dynamic executable
>
> SODIUM is from mysql amd64 tarball. Did I download the wrong tarball or do I
> need to hack libc and link them by myself?
No. I've forgot to tell that th
6 (0x003c7170)
libc.so.6 => /lib64/tls/libc.so.6 (0x003c7140)
/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 => /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2
(0x003c7120)
and this (from a 32bit installation)
neon:/usr/local/mysql# ldd bin/mysqld
not a dynamic executable
SODIUM
due to our AMD solution and
some mySQL optimizations Friendster is FAST.
DVP
Dathan Vance Pattishall http://www.friendster.com
> -Original Message-
> From: Miles Keaton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 1:48 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject:
Miles Keaton wrote:
> We've got a really high-load MySQL server and are planning to get a
> new server.
>
> Has anyone seen tests comparing performance of MySQL on AMD64
> versus Xeon CPUs?
These tests are about a year old, but showed the Opteron was usually 50
to 100 percent
We've got a really high-load MySQL server and are planning to get a new server.
Has anyone seen tests comparing performance of MySQL on AMD64 versus Xeon CPUs?
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[
"bad corn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Recently our company has purchased a dual amd64 opteron machine for mysql
> server purpose.
Whatever Linux you choose please better run MySQL officialy built binaries. Due
to some known glibc/gcc issues the officially built binar
[snip]
> Debian is our first choice, but on the Debian/AMD64 howto, it is stated
that
> the port is still in beta stage. Does anyone have experiences with
> debian/amd64 + mysql? I would love to know if mysql will run on it before
> giving it a try..
[snip]
AFAIK, Debian is now votin
On Tuesday 27 July 2004 05:31, Daniel Kasak wrote:
> As you probably know, not all software is perfectly supported on x86-64
> under Linux at the moment. This includes glibc, gcc, binutils, etc.
> There are always patches coming in. If you run Gentoo, you have
> *incredibly* painless updates to ALL
bad corn wrote:
Hi all,
Recently our company has purchased a dual amd64 opteron machine for mysql
server purpose.
It seems that there are not many os choices for us.
Here is the list of OS that we are going to test (in listed order):
- debian (amd64)
- fedora2 (amd64)
- suse (amd64
Hi all,
Recently our company has purchased a dual amd64 opteron machine for mysql
server purpose.
It seems that there are not many os choices for us.
Here is the list of OS that we are going to test (in listed order):
- debian (amd64)
- fedora2 (amd64)
- suse (amd64 or 32bit mode
Hi,
Deeply appreciated your helps.
(See attached file: failed_mysql_report)
S.C. Lin 林聖哲
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, Ltd.
No. 6, Li-Hsin Rd.6, Science-Based Industrial Park Hsin-Chu, Taiwan 300-77,
R.O.C.
Tel: 03-666
Ext: 4770
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
MySQL General Mailing List
n. I tried to compile my UDF with the
>> gcc on my Opteron system and I got errors.
>> Errors:
>> /usr/lib64/gcc-lib/amd64-mandrake-linux-
gnu/3.3.1/../../../../lib64/crt1.o(.text+0x21):
>> In function `_start':
>> ../sysdeps/x86_64/elf/start.S:92: undefined referenc
In the last episode (Dec 11), Ollie Gallardo said:
> I'm back with another question. I tried to compile my UDF with the gcc on
> my Opteron system and I got errors.
> Errors:
> /usr/lib64/gcc-lib/amd64-mandrake-linux-gnu/3.3.1/../../../../lib64/crt1.o(.text+0x21):
>
I'm back with another question. I tried to compile my UDF with the gcc on
my Opteron system and I got errors.
Errors:
/usr/lib64/gcc-lib/amd64-mandrake-linux-gnu/3.3.1/../../../../lib64/crt1.o(.text+0x21):
In function `_start':
../sysdeps/x86_64/elf/start.S:92: undefined reference to `m
Thanks Dan. I will get to it then.
Dan Nelson said:
> In the last episode (Dec 11), Ollie Gallardo said:
>> I just recently built myself a dual Opteron system and installed mysql
>> for AMD64 on it. I previously ran my databases on regular 32 bit
>> systems and had my UDF wor
In the last episode (Dec 11), Ollie Gallardo said:
> I just recently built myself a dual Opteron system and installed
> mysql for AMD64 on it. I previously ran my databases on regular 32
> bit systems and had my UDF working fine. The UDF is written in C.
> Before I try and install th
Hi,
I just recently built myself a dual Opteron system and installed mysql for
AMD64 on it. I previously ran my databases on regular 32 bit systems and
had my UDF working fine. The UDF is written in C. Before I try and install
the UDF on the new system should I recompile it using AMD64 libraries
one database of ~5M and ~1M records in size.
I'm just wondering if there's some reason why performance on AMD64 is to be
expected to be like this or did I compile MySQL without a correct option or
something like that. Maybe I've got something in my.cnf set _way_ off for this
type of
wn risk as I
am guessing!
Greg
-Original Message-
From: Owen Scott Medd [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 03 November 2003 15:08
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: MySQL 4.0.16 on RHEL3 AS AMD64
I should sleep before posting, I suppose.
I suppose this is the issue with the NPTL threads librar
Sent: 03 November 2003 15:08
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: MySQL 4.0.16 on RHEL3 AS AMD64
>
>
> I should sleep before posting, I suppose.
>
> I suppose this is the issue with the NPTL threads library?
> If so, has
> anyone dealt with that issue with MySQL?
I should sleep before posting, I suppose.
I suppose this is the issue with the NPTL threads library? If so, has
anyone dealt with that issue with MySQL? I remember hearing that
perhaps using a dynamically linked mysqld would work around the problem.
Owen
Owen Scott Medd wrote:
I have Red Ha
I have Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3 AS installed on a dual Opteron server
with 16GB of memory (hoping to solve innodb_buffer_pool size issues
under x86). I upgraded the MySQL included with RHEL3 (3.23.58) to the
4.0.16 rpms from the MySQL website.
I had thought this would be a piece of cake, as
78 matches
Mail list logo
