;
Sent: Friday, October 03, 2003 7:49 PM
Subject: Re: Newbye speed question - which setup to use for indexing
> Jeremy Zawodny wrote:
>
> >On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 06:23:24PM -0400, Ware Adams wrote:
> >>Peer Reiser wrote:
> >>
> >>>Next week I will have access t
Jeremy Zawodny wrote:
>On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 06:23:24PM -0400, Ware Adams wrote:
>>Peer Reiser wrote:
>>
>>>Next week I will have access to a new PomerMac G5 with Dual 2GHZ
>>>processors, and i want to do some indexing. Does anyone know if
>>>MySQL will take advantage of dual processors if the o
On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 06:23:24PM -0400, Ware Adams wrote:
> Peer Reiser wrote:
>
> >Next week I will have access to a new PomerMac G5 with Dual 2GHZ
> >processors, and i want to do some indexing. Does anyone know if MySQL
> >will take advantage of dual processors if the only process running is
>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| > Sent: Friday, October 03, 2003 6:57 PM
| > Subject: Newbye speed question
| >
| >
| >> HI
| >>
| >> I am having a MYISAM database with 27 million rows and 19 fields all
| >> char between 15 and 1 characters long.
| >>
| &g
Andy Eastham wrote:
>How big are the table and index files? Can your OS handle files
>bigger than 2/4Gb?
Yes, OS X can deal with files larger than 4 GB.
--Ware
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTEC
Peer Reiser wrote:
>Next week I will have access to a new PomerMac G5 with Dual 2GHZ
>processors, and i want to do some indexing. Does anyone know if MySQL
>will take advantage of dual processors if the only process running is
>the indexing process??
No, it won't directly. However, other process
Peer Reiser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 03 October 2003 10:28
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Newbye speed question - which setup to use for indexing
>
>
> Next week I will have access to a new PomerMac G5 with Dual 2GHZ
> processors,
> and i want to do some indexing.
Next week I will have access to a new PomerMac G5 with Dual 2GHZ
processors,
and i want to do some indexing.
Does anyone know if MySQL will take advantage of dual processors if the
only process running is the indexing process??
Is disk I/O more important ?
The bad temper of my boss seems to inc
>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, October 03, 2003 6:57 PM
Subject: Newbye speed question
HI
I am having a MYISAM database with 27 million rows and 19 fields all
char between 15 and 1 characters long.
yesterday i did a
alter table mytablename add column (version char(2));
By now (
18hrs??? So, the database has been LOCKED for 18hrs
- Original Message -
From: "Peer Reiser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, October 03, 2003 6:57 PM
Subject: Newbye speed question
> HI
>
> I am having a MYISAM datab
HI
I am having a MYISAM database with 27 million rows and 19 fields all
char between 15 and 1 characters long.
yesterday i did a
alter table mytablename add column (version char(2));
By now (18 hours later) it has not finished yet?
Is there a way to somehow predict the time needed for this? Or t
BD [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 10:42 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Speed question.
At 01:17 AM 3/20/2002, you wrote:
>An Oracle DB programmer reviewed a query that I wrote and told me that
>putting constants at the beginning of the que
At 01:17 AM 3/20/2002, you wrote:
>An Oracle DB programmer reviewed a query that I wrote and told me that
>putting constants at the beginning of the query would make it slower. I
>thought I'd go to the experts on MySQL and be told the truth one way of
>the other.
>
>Example query:
>
>SELECT
>
On Wed, Mar 20, 2002 at 12:17:58AM -0700, zxcv wrote:
>
> An Oracle DB programmer reviewed a query that I wrote and told me
> that putting constants at the beginning of the query would make it
> slower. I thought I'd go to the experts on MySQL and be told the
> truth one way of the other.
Perhap
An Oracle DB programmer reviewed a query that I wrote and told me that
putting constants at the beginning of the query would make it slower. I
thought I'd go to the experts on MySQL and be told the truth one way of
the other.
Example query:
SELECT
TABLE1.COL,
TABLE2.COL
FROM
Ok, thanks for the input. I'll work on optimizing the code and look at the
indexes.
ryc wrote:
> Changing to C++ is not likely to give you a noticable speed difference
> because your bottleneck is not the code but the queries. With proper
> database design you should be able to acheive those res
Changing to C++ is not likely to give you a noticable speed difference
because your bottleneck is not the code but the queries. With proper
database design you should be able to acheive those results with one query,
and it should be fast if given the right indexes.
ryan
> I am searching to spee
maybe some systems files
> was damaged.
>
> >From: Carl Schrader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: Mysql <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Subject: Speed question
> >Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 08:08:15 -0700
> >
> >I am searching to speed up an operation I have, which wo
table was indexed MySql speed up.
I remember, once time before I had slows queries from MySql (too slow) until
I re-install Windows in my work station computer. maybe some systems files
was damaged.
>From: Carl Schrader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: Mysql <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
h filed to build your result you should
> compact the query in to one i.e.
> if you are doing
> select MM from table1 where record_num = 3
> select Title from table1 where record_num = 3
> select Archive from table1 where record_num = 3
> then you should replac
I am searching to speed up an operation I have, which works - it just
takes minutes to finish. The current script is written in pike (a C like
scripting language). I believe that most of the overhead is the multiple
queries. Would using C++ be significantly faster? (I'd have to learn
some C before
21 matches
Mail list logo
