#mysql
20 October 2007
Total 24 pages. You are browsing page 3/24.
First :: Prev :: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [...] :: Next :: Last
01:19 <****> wait, maybe i am not
01:20 <****> fuse, i also notice that the docs uses memset(bind, 0, sizeof(bind)) , not memset(bind, 0, sizeof(MYSQL_BIND)*3); probably does not matter, but that is neater
01:20 <****> yes you can grant other users privileges at your own privilege level if you have the grant option
01:20 <****> http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/grant.html
01:20 <****> search for "The with grant option clause"
01:21 <****> gnari: yeah, i had it that way at first, but i thought it might be an issue with the bind not getting inialized correctly, hence the *3
01:22 <****> fuse. bind[0].length = 0; is wrong, no?
01:22 <****> length = 0 is correct for numeric types
01:22 <****> fuse should it not be: bind[0].length = sizeof(event_id); ?
01:23 <****> not according to the docs
01:23 <****> from docs "http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/c-api-prepared-statement-datatypes.html
01:23 <****> oops
01:24 <****> From docs "This is a number type, so there is no need to specify buffer_length
01:24 <****> ebergen: right, but my question is more specific. I had some table level restrictions I set on myself (not that I remember setting them), and while I could edit them to grant-alls (effectively, anyway, doing a grant all with the same details), I feel it's cleaner to remove these rules instead instead. I probably can't do *that* because I'm not a superuser, yes?
01:24 <****> fuse, yes, i just saw
01:24 <****> k
01:25 <****> hm
01:26 <****> help me with this error please
01:26 <****> InnoDB: Operating system error number 13 in a file operation.
01:26 <****> InnoDB: The error means mysqld does not have the access rights to
01:26 <****> InnoDB: the directory.
01:26 <****> InnoDB: File name /dev/raw/raw1
01:26 <****> InnoDB: File operation call: 'open'.
01:26 <****> InnoDB: Cannot continue operation.
01:26 <****> OH NO!
01:26 <****> h1pp1e what is error number 13?
01:27 <****> fuse, then you will have to do some more debugging. maybe your problem is elsewhere, like where you initialize mime_stmt ? i don't do C, so i can't really help much. i just provided another eyeball
01:27 <****> ebergen: i dont have idea
01:27 <****> some people can't read:)
01:27 <****> gnari: possible, but the init does error, nor the bind
01:28 <****> h1pp1e, what does this say: ls -l /dev/raw/raw1
01:29 <****> gnari: ls -l /dev/raw/raw1
01:29 <****> crwxrwxrwx 1 mysql disk 162, 1 Oct 19 14:17 /dev/raw/raw1
01:29 <****> ID: 95 Key: Date Value: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 23:28:17 GMT
01:29 <****> h1pp1e, how was mysqld started?
01:30 <****> i did a printf at the beginning of the function, and it provides that
01:30 <****> so the data makes it in scope
01:30 <****> gnari: /etc/init.d/mysql start
01:30 <****> gnari: i have RHE 4
01:30 <****> h1pp1e, as root?
01:30 <****> gnari: yes
01:31 <****> h1pp1e, sounds reasonable
01:31 <****> gnari: may i privmsg you a link?
01:31 <****> h1pp1e, what about : ls -ld /dev/raw
01:32 <****> fuse, not really. you are better off getting help from someone on this channel that actuallu has used the API
01:32 <****> http://rafb.net/p/huvDXr11.html
01:33 <****> that is the code i use to prepare the statement
01:33 <****> gnari: ls -ld /dev/raw
01:33 <****> drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 60 Oct 19 14:17 /dev/raw
01:33 <****> fuse, can you have that code print out the query ?
01:34 <****> h1pp1e, looks normal
01:34 <****> CALL Insert(?,?,?);
01:34 <****> that is what i prints
01:35 <****> and that is right
01:35 <****> fuse, oh, it is a stored procedure
01:35 <****> gnari: i using this reference http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/innodb-raw-devices.html and this one http://kbase.redhat.com/faq/FAQ_51_259.shtm
01:35 <****> gnari: i guess i should have mentioned that.
01:35 <****> gnari: i am using a stored procedure as a prepared statemetn in another spot and it is working.
01:38 <****> it looks like i am not much help to anyone tonight
01:41 <****> gnari: thanks
01:42 <****> hi
01:44 <****> i'm wondering, is it better to have more related tables with less fields our less tables with more fields?
01:44 <****> (not talking about normalization)
01:45 <****> just query speeds
01:46 <****> logik-bomb, what do you mean by "more related tables" ?
01:47 <****> joining tables to get results
01:50 <****> logik-bomb, are these tables with a 1-to-1 relationship with each other?
01:51 <****> y
01:51 <****> logik-bomb, you are talking about vertical partitioning
01:51 <****> I dont know :S
01:52 <****> logik-bomb, there are situations where vertical partitioning is called for, but one should not consider it unless one has particular performance problems
01:52 <****> I will search about vertical partitioning
01:53 <****> thanks for the help
01:53 <****> :)
01:53 <****> logik-bomb: The answer is yes.
01:53 <****> Xgc, more tables?
01:53 <****> logik-bomb: gnari is correct. But the answer is either approach could be beneficial. It depends on other details you haven't provided.
01:54 <****> ok Xgc
01:54 <****> thanks
01:54 <****> logik-bomb, one such situation is when you have a few small fields that are often used, and a bunch of large fields that are seldom used, and query patterns using the small fields that often result in tablescans
01:55 <****> Xgc: hey thanks for your helpbefore by the way. totally worked.
01:55 <****> hypnos23: No problem. You're welcome.
01:55 <****> logik-bomb, of course, one should first do the outmost to fix the queries to avoid tablescans
01:57 <****> I understand
01:57 <****> thanks again
02:10 <****> is there a way to keep a single mysql connection from eating up all of mysql's resources
02:11 <****> Knat, write better queries :)
02:12 <****> Knat: define "resources"
02:12 <****> but in general, no
02:28 <****> hey guys, I'm trying to write a query to get a list of polls from a database. I have two tables, the polls table and a boring_polls table. What I have to do is get all the polls from the polls table where a user has not marked it as boring. Currently I have "SELECT * FROM polls INNER JOIN boring_polls ON (polls.id != boring_polls.poll_id)". This works, but i get me the opposite data that I want without a WHERE boring_polls.user_id = # clause
02:28 <****> anyone have any hints on how to go about this
02:29 <****> anyone know how to list all users in mysql?
02:31 <****> malomalo, how about : SELECT * FROM polls LEFT JOIN boring_polls ON (polls.id = boring_polls.poll_id) WHERE boring_polls.poll_id IS NULL
02:33 <****> malomalo, or: SELECT * FROM polls where id NOT IN (SELECT poll_id FROM boring_polls)
02:33 <****> hello guys.
02:33 <****> malomalo, or: SELECT * FROM polls WHERE NOT EXISTS (SELECT 1 FROM boring_polls WHERE polls.id = boring_polls.poll_id)
02:34 <****> is there anything better than fulltext for large amount of registries?
02:34 <****> gnari: ahh, yeah the first one works, and the second one. If I also need to filter out the boring_polls by selecting only the boring_polls with id = user_id which option would you suggest?
02:34 <****>1
02:35 <****> I have exactly 63721058 records in a table, and I'm indexing (fulltext) only one column. it's running since yesterday, about 17 hours.
Total 24 pages. You are browsing page 3/24.
First :: Prev :: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [...] :: Next :: Last