ok kentoku
the idea is, if the client (the mysql user) use SQL_CACHE, send it to
spider external servers, if SQL_NO_CACHE is used, send it to spider
external servers, if SQL_CACHE and SQL_NO_CACHE aren't used, use
'query_cache_type' variable (
https://mariadb.com/kb/en/server-system-variables/#quer
I don't use it in production, but this may change in the future. The problem is
that I cannot enable it when I need it, if I don't want to restart the server.
Regards
Federico
El mar, 3/6/14, Colin Charles escribió:
Asunto: [Maria-discuss] PERFORM
Hi Kentoku
Yes, I repaired mysql.spider_tables. But the problem with the `user` table
remains. Since I could not find any solution, I reported this bug:
https://mariadb.atlassian.net/browse/MDEV-6293
Regards
Federico
El mar, 3/6/14, kentoku escribi
Hi Federico and Ian,
> Sorry for flooding. I've read your bug report, Ian. If I understand
> correctly, SPIDER ignores the CONNECTION option. So 6268 and 5559 could be
> the same bug (both with incorrect title: in 6268, Elena's comment explains
> the problem).
This is bug of Spider's table dis
Am 03.06.2014 21:30, schrieb AskMonty KB:
> A new question has been asked in "MariaDB community" by cyberdomecyberdome:
>
> How much storage is available in the FREE versions of MariaDB 5.x and 10.x?
>
> I just want to know how much upto storage available in the M
Hi Roberto,
> nice Colin, I read manual and got this doubt, about the query_cache option
>
> all queries have sql_cache, or just queries that should be cached?
> for example...
>
> (1)mysql user -> (2)mysql database with spider -> (3)external database
> considering at (1 session) and (2 global), s
Hello,
A new question has been asked in "MariaDB community" by cyberdomecyberdome:
How much storage is available in the FREE versions of MariaDB 5.x and 10.x?
I just want to know how much upto storage available in the MariaDB 5.0 and 10.0
free version?
---
hi sergei, i think it's easy too
maybe we could have some kind of servers, one for debug, one for
production with instrumentations features and a clean server without
intrumentations, just an idea, i think some time ago mysql was
releasing mysql-dev, mysql-debug, mysql-xxx i'm wrong?
2014-06-03 14
Hi, Pavel!
On Jun 03, Pavel Ivanov wrote:
> I personally would prefer if MariaDB had performance schema not
> compiled in by default. Then we wouldn't be frustrated every time we
> upgrade and find out that the tarball doesn't compile without
> performance schema (yes, 10.0.11 doesn't compile).
T
On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 04:20:25PM +0800, Colin Charles wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Recently there was chat about how PERFORMANCE_SCHEMA was enabled by mistake
> and it should be disabled in the 10.0 series. I'm curious - how many of you
> are using PERFORMANCE_SCHEMA? Is it a problem to turn it on, if
hum, maybe a "-debug" package and a "-production" package could be better
if someone what a developer version get the -debug, for production use
"-production"
is it easy to create two kinds of packages at mariadb release time?
2014-06-03 14:10 GMT-03:00 Pavel Ivanov :
> I personally would prefer
I personally would prefer if MariaDB had performance schema not
compiled in by default. Then we wouldn't be frustrated every time we
upgrade and find out that the tarball doesn't compile without
performance schema (yes, 10.0.11 doesn't compile).
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 1:20 AM, Colin Charles wrote
oh sorry, at development just performacnce-schema=1
and sometimes when i need more information i try two others plugins to
check query times and query cache informations (hit rate per query)
2014-06-03 14:00 GMT-03:00 Sergei Golubchik :
> Hi, Roberto!
>
> On Jun 03, Roberto Spadim wrote:
>> i only
i will check but i compile every production binary from source, i
think it's a compile time option not my.cnf file, i will check and
return
2014-06-03 14:00 GMT-03:00 Sergei Golubchik :
> Hi, Roberto!
>
> On Jun 03, Roberto Spadim wrote:
>> i only use it at development, at production it's not used
Hi, Roberto!
On Jun 03, Roberto Spadim wrote:
> i only use it at development, at production it's not used
And what performance-schema related options do you have in your
development my.cnf file? Is it only performance-schema=1 or something
more involved?
> >> Recently there was chat about how PE
Hi,
Never used it on production. From my point of view, it should be
disabled by default, but included.
The whole purpose of this variable is to have a way to analyze/optimize
performances easily, when needed; if it's enable by default, we have a
perf hit, so that's counterproductive.
I assu
i only use it at development, at production it's not used
2014-06-03 6:24 GMT-03:00 Jean Weisbuch :
> I personally never had time to give much looks to P_S, i gave it some
> looks but never seriously dug onto and really had to keep it enabled on a
> production server, its a nice feature but i th
On 06/03/2014 09:43 AM, Colin Charles wrote:
Hey Honza,
It seems that you were silent on this - just wanted to know if Red Hat is OK
with things
Thanks for bringing it to my attention and sorry about being silent.
I don't see any problem for RH/Fedora, feel free to include it and we're
alre
I think it would be a most useful feature, as I moved most of my stuff to
CQL3 ... which is also why I chipped in, so whoever gets the new driver
working can get at least some cool pints (or coffee) in exchange.
M
On 27 May 2014 07:38, Colin Charles wrote:
>
> On 16 May 2014, at 05:37, Mohamme
I personally never had time to give much looks to P_S, i gave it some
looks but never seriously dug onto and really had to keep it enabled on
a production server, its a nice feature but i think that if someone
knows it and needs it, they will be able to enable it but most of the
"common" users
Hi all,
Recently there was chat about how PERFORMANCE_SCHEMA was enabled by mistake and
it should be disabled in the 10.0 series. I'm curious - how many of you are
using PERFORMANCE_SCHEMA? Is it a problem to turn it on, if you use it?
I'm referring to:
https://mariadb.atlassian.net/br
21 matches
Mail list logo
