Re: InnoDB and raw tablespace
No, files can be bigger than 2GB. In OSX prior to Panther there is a 2GB per-process memory limit though. Then again, on anything other than the PowerMac G5 this doesn't matter because the G5 is the only Mac that can hold more than 2GB of RAM. - Gabriel On Tuesday, November 4, 2003, at 04:42 PM, Chris Nolan wrote: 2GB limit? On MacOS X? On almost every OS I've played with lately, the file size limit is massive - as in far beyond what disc capacity today will allow. Does MacOS X have a 2GB limit? Regards, Chris On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 04:03 am, Mark Lubratt wrote: On Tuesday, November 4, 2003, at 10:25 AM, Harald Fuchs wrote: In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Mark Lubratt mark dot lubratt at indeq dot com writes: I'm considering this option to keep database maintenance to a minimum (running out of tablespace issues). That way, InnoDB already owns all the disk space and I don't have to continually be adding tablespace files. Huh? What's wrong with :autoextend? :autoextend works great until the 2GB file limit is reached. Then you have to add another autoextending tablespace file. If I can just make a large raw tablespace, then I don't have to bother with adding additional tablespace files every so often. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: InnoDB and raw tablespace
On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 12:08:29PM +1100, Chris Nolan wrote: To my knowledge, ext2 does have the [2GB filesize] limitation but ext3 does not. ext2 does not have this limitation. It was never a limitation of the filesystem, only kernel/glibc. On 64bit architectures ext2 has been handling large files for the past eight(?) years. On 32 bit architectures the kernel and libc have been handling large files on ext2 for at least two years. I hate to keep posting the same thing to this list, but I keep seeing the same misinformation that ext2 can't handle large files. It can. Cheers, --Pete -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: InnoDB and raw tablespace
If I recall correctly, the G5, the mighty PowerPC 970, is used by Apple just as Windows currently uses the mighty Hammer series from AMD - as a souped up 32-bit processor. Regards, Chris Gabriel Ricard wrote: No, files can be bigger than 2GB. In OSX prior to Panther there is a 2GB per-process memory limit though. Then again, on anything other than the PowerMac G5 this doesn't matter because the G5 is the only Mac that can hold more than 2GB of RAM. - Gabriel On Tuesday, November 4, 2003, at 04:42 PM, Chris Nolan wrote: 2GB limit? On MacOS X? On almost every OS I've played with lately, the file size limit is massive - as in far beyond what disc capacity today will allow. Does MacOS X have a 2GB limit? Regards, Chris On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 04:03 am, Mark Lubratt wrote: On Tuesday, November 4, 2003, at 10:25 AM, Harald Fuchs wrote: In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Mark Lubratt mark dot lubratt at indeq dot com writes: I'm considering this option to keep database maintenance to a minimum (running out of tablespace issues). That way, InnoDB already owns all the disk space and I don't have to continually be adding tablespace files. Huh? What's wrong with :autoextend? :autoextend works great until the 2GB file limit is reached. Then you have to add another autoextending tablespace file. If I can just make a large raw tablespace, then I don't have to bother with adding additional tablespace files every so often. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: InnoDB and raw tablespace
How about we just all agree that SCO's OSes can't handle large files, and therefore should all be avoided in favour of completely superior OSes, like FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Linux, NetBSD and DOS 2.11 Regards, Chris Pete Harlan wrote: On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 12:08:29PM +1100, Chris Nolan wrote: To my knowledge, ext2 does have the [2GB filesize] limitation but ext3 does not. ext2 does not have this limitation. It was never a limitation of the filesystem, only kernel/glibc. On 64bit architectures ext2 has been handling large files for the past eight(?) years. On 32 bit architectures the kernel and libc have been handling large files on ext2 for at least two years. I hate to keep posting the same thing to this list, but I keep seeing the same misinformation that ext2 can't handle large files. It can. Cheers, --Pete -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
InnoDB and raw tablespace
I'm considering using the raw tablespace from InnoDB for a project I'm working on. I noticed a couple of years ago that there were reports of tablespace corruption on Linux and these raw tablespaces. Have these problems been fixed? I'm considering running it on a hardware RAID (stripes of mirrors, I forget if that's RAID 10, or RAID 01). Should I use FreeBSD instead of Linux? I'm considering this option to keep database maintenance to a minimum (running out of tablespace issues). That way, InnoDB already owns all the disk space and I don't have to continually be adding tablespace files. Any thoughts? Mark -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: InnoDB and raw tablespace
On Tuesday, November 4, 2003, at 10:25 AM, Harald Fuchs wrote: In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Mark Lubratt mark dot lubratt at indeq dot com writes: I'm considering this option to keep database maintenance to a minimum (running out of tablespace issues). That way, InnoDB already owns all the disk space and I don't have to continually be adding tablespace files. Huh? What's wrong with :autoextend? :autoextend works great until the 2GB file limit is reached. Then you have to add another autoextending tablespace file. If I can just make a large raw tablespace, then I don't have to bother with adding additional tablespace files every so often. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: InnoDB and raw tablespace
On Tuesday, November 4, 2003, at 11:25 AM, Harald Fuchs wrote: In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Mark Lubratt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm considering using the raw tablespace from InnoDB for a project I'm working on. I noticed a couple of years ago that there were reports of tablespace corruption on Linux and these raw tablespaces. Have these problems been fixed? Yes. I'm using a raw disk for some months now, without any problems. However, I've heard that it doesn't give the performance improvement I'd expected. Try it yourself. I don't have specific numbers in front of me right now, but I tested the raw performance of InnoDB on a G5 running OSX 10.3 and it was actually worse than using regular files. I'll see if I can dig up the specific numbers. - Gabriel -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: InnoDB and raw tablespace
2GB limit? On MacOS X? On almost every OS I've played with lately, the file size limit is massive - as in far beyond what disc capacity today will allow. Does MacOS X have a 2GB limit? Regards, Chris On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 04:03 am, Mark Lubratt wrote: On Tuesday, November 4, 2003, at 10:25 AM, Harald Fuchs wrote: In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Mark Lubratt mark dot lubratt at indeq dot com writes: I'm considering this option to keep database maintenance to a minimum (running out of tablespace issues). That way, InnoDB already owns all the disk space and I don't have to continually be adding tablespace files. Huh? What's wrong with :autoextend? :autoextend works great until the 2GB file limit is reached. Then you have to add another autoextending tablespace file. If I can just make a large raw tablespace, then I don't have to bother with adding additional tablespace files every so often. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: InnoDB and raw tablespace
Chris Nolan wrote: 2GB limit? On MacOS X? On almost every OS I've played with lately, the file size limit is massive - as in far beyond what disc capacity today will allow. Does MacOS X have a 2GB limit? No, OS X has a file size limit of 2 TB (prior to 10.2), 8 TB (10.2.x) or 16 TB (10.3). http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=25557 --Ware Regards, Chris On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 04:03 am, Mark Lubratt wrote: On Tuesday, November 4, 2003, at 10:25 AM, Harald Fuchs wrote: In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Mark Lubratt mark dot lubratt at indeq dot com writes: I'm considering this option to keep database maintenance to a minimum (running out of tablespace issues). That way, InnoDB already owns all the disk space and I don't have to continually be adding tablespace files. Huh? What's wrong with :autoextend? :autoextend works great until the 2GB file limit is reached. Then you have to add another autoextending tablespace file. If I can just make a large raw tablespace, then I don't have to bother with adding additional tablespace files every so often. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: InnoDB and raw tablespace
On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 01:42:23AM -0600, Mark Lubratt wrote: I'm considering using the raw tablespace from InnoDB for a project I'm working on. I noticed a couple of years ago that there were reports of tablespace corruption on Linux and these raw tablespaces. Have these problems been fixed? I'm considering running it on a hardware RAID (stripes of mirrors, I forget if that's RAID 10, or RAID 01). Should I use FreeBSD instead of Linux? I'm considering this option to keep database maintenance to a minimum (running out of tablespace issues). That way, InnoDB already owns all the disk space and I don't have to continually be adding tablespace files. Any thoughts? I usually tell people to think twice about using raw disks for two main reasons: 1. Performance. I've not seen anybody report a significant performance boost doing this. 2. Transparency. It's nice to be able to use a wider variety of tools to examine, copy, back up, and otherwise tinker with data. By using a raw disk, you lose most of this. However, if the performance gain is really there, maybe it's more important than #2. Jeremy -- Jeremy D. Zawodny | Perl, Web, MySQL, Linux Magazine, Yahoo! [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://jeremy.zawodny.com/ MySQL 4.0.15-Yahoo-SMP: up 51 days, processed 1,925,631,314 queries (428/sec. avg) -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: InnoDB and raw tablespace
To my knowledge, ext2 does have the limitation but ext3 does not. Additionally, ReiserFS, JFS and XFS all have disgustingly large file size limits. As a side note, apparently NetWare has major file size limitations (going on Gupta's SQLBase documentation) Regards, Chris Mark Lubratt wrote: No, I'm thinking about ext2 on Linux. Which I'm pretty sure has a 2GB limit. Ext3 has the same limitation. Both filesystems will support larger file sizes if the kernel is configured with Large Filesystem Support (LFS). The last time I heard, this is still not fully implemented (at least enough to trust to something like this...) I could certainly be wrong on the LFS status. If so, please let me know, I'm running RH9. Mark On Tuesday, November 4, 2003, at 03:42 PM, Chris Nolan wrote: 2GB limit? On MacOS X? On almost every OS I've played with lately, the file size limit is massive - as in far beyond what disc capacity today will allow. Does MacOS X have a 2GB limit? Regards, Chris On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 04:03 am, Mark Lubratt wrote: On Tuesday, November 4, 2003, at 10:25 AM, Harald Fuchs wrote: In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Mark Lubratt mark dot lubratt at indeq dot com writes: I'm considering this option to keep database maintenance to a minimum (running out of tablespace issues). That way, InnoDB already owns all the disk space and I don't have to continually be adding tablespace files. Huh? What's wrong with :autoextend? :autoextend works great until the 2GB file limit is reached. Then you have to add another autoextending tablespace file. If I can just make a large raw tablespace, then I don't have to bother with adding additional tablespace files every so often. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
