Search Results

Search found 592 results on 24 pages for 'innodb'.

Page 14/24 | < Previous Page | 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21  | Next Page >

  • MySQL Open Source Backup and Recovery Alternative: Xtrabackup

    MySQL database administrators are always looking for a solid backup and recovery tool that will suit all their needs. Xtrabackup, created by Percona, is the open source alternative to the commercial Innodb Hot Backup tool. This article explains a good methodology for testing and verifying Xtrabackups capabilities and precision.

    Read the article

  • i got mysql error on this statement i don't know why [closed]

    - by John Smiith
    i got mysql error on this statement i don't know why error is: #1064 - You have an error in your SQL syntax; check the manual that corresponds to your MySQL server version for the right syntax to use near 'CONSTRAINT fk_objet_code FOREIGN KEY (objet_code) REFERENCES objet(code) ) ENG' at line 6 sql code is CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `class` ( `numero` int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `type_class` varchar(100) DEFAULT NULL, `images` varchar(200) NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`numero`) CONSTRAINT fk_objet_code FOREIGN KEY (objet_code) REFERENCES objet(code) ) ENGINE=InnoDB;;

    Read the article

  • ???????/???MySQL?????

    - by Yusuke.Yamamoto
    ????? ??:2011/07/25 ??:??????/?? Web??????????????????????????? MySQL ????????????????????MySQL ???????????????? MySQL / MySQL Server ????MySQL ????????????MySQL???????&????????? / ?????·?????????·?????????????????????MySQL ???????????????MySQL Server ???????????????????&???????????InnoDB ???????TipsMySQL ???? ????????? ????????????????? http://otndnld.oracle.co.jp/ondemand/otn-seminar/movie/20110725MySQL_Overview.wmv http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/jp/ondemand/db-new/20110725-ou-overview-455758-ja.pdf

    Read the article

  • Updated XAMPP with MySQL, all my tables are missing

    - by user371699
    I just updated XAMPP to a newer version, which included updating MySQL from 5.5 to 5.6. Using phpMyAdmin, however, all of my tables within my databases still appear on the left navigation panel, but the main window shows that all my databases are empty (except for information_schema, and a couple other default tables.) Clicking on a table in the navigation panel gives me a "table doesn't exist" message. It does looks like information_schema.tables doesn't have my tables, either. Can anyone assist me with this? I did make a complete backup of all my databases before the upgrade, but I first want to see if I can fix this the "normal" way. Furthermore, I'm not sure if the MySQL upgrade involved making changes to the information/performance databases, so I don't know if I can restore the old ones. Thank you. EDIT: Continuing my searching, I realized that only the INNODB databases are missing. I've tried running the following with no avail: /opt/lampp/bin $ sudo ./mysql_install_db --basedir=/opt/lampp and /opt/lampp/bin $ sudo ./mysql_install_db --basedir=/opt/lampp --datadir=/opt/lampp/var/mysql The my.cnf file in /opt/lampp/etc contains the following InnoDB settings: innodb_data_home_dir = /opt/lampp/var/mysql/ innodb_data_file_path = ibdata1:10M:autoextend innodb_log_group_home_dir = /opt/lampp/var/mysql/ # You can set .._buffer_pool_size up to 50 - 80 % # of RAM but beware of setting memory usage too high innodb_buffer_pool_size = 16M # Deprecated in 5.6 #innodb_additional_mem_pool_size = 2M # Set .._log_file_size to 25 % of buffer pool size innodb_log_file_size = 5M innodb_log_buffer_size = 8M innodb_flush_log_at_trx_commit = 1 innodb_lock_wait_timeout = 50 What could possibly be wrong? Why is the information_schema not updating correctly? It looks like /opt/lampp/var/mysql has all my tables in it within the database directories, but they're still not showing up in information_schema.

    Read the article

  • What am I doing wrong in my config for MySql?

    - by Knight Hawk3
    When I load my my.conf with the config at the bottom Mysql fails to start and prints no errors. I am running Arch Linux (Updated) with the latest MySQL (5.5) and the latest nginx (Well latest in the repository, Not sure how to check. Only installed it today) I will give you any info you ask for. Thanks for helping! # The following options will be passed to all MySQL clients [client] #password = your_password port = 3306 socket = /var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock # Here follows entries for some specific programs # The MySQL server [mysqld] port = 3306 socket = /var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock skip-locking key_buffer = 16K max_allowed_packet = 1M table_cache = 4 sort_buffer_size = 64K read_buffer_size = 256K read_rnd_buffer_size = 256K net_buffer_length = 2K thread_stack = 64K # Don’t listen on a TCP/IP port at all. This can be a security enhancement, # if all processes that need to connect to mysqld run on the same host. # All interaction with mysqld must be made via Unix sockets or named pipes. # Note that using this option without enabling named pipes on Windows # (using the “enable-named-pipe” option) will render mysqld useless! # #skip-networking server-id = 1 # Uncomment the following if you want to log updates #log-bin=mysql-bin # Uncomment the following if you are NOT using BDB tables skip-bdb # Uncomment the following if you are using InnoDB tables #innodb_data_home_dir = /var/lib/mysql/ #innodb_data_file_path = ibdata1:10M:autoextend #innodb_log_group_home_dir = /var/lib/mysql/ #innodb_log_arch_dir = /var/lib/mysql/ # You can set .._buffer_pool_size up to 50 – 80 % # of RAM but beware of setting memory usage too high #innodb_buffer_pool_size = 16M #innodb_additional_mem_pool_size = 2M # Set .._log_file_size to 25 % of buffer pool size #innodb_log_file_size = 5M #innodb_log_buffer_size = 8M #innodb_flush_log_at_trx_commit = 1 #innodb_lock_wait_timeout = 50 skip-innodb [mysqldump] quick max_allowed_packet = 16M [mysql] no-auto-rehash # Remove the next comment character if you are not familiar with SQL #safe-updates [isamchk] key_buffer = 1M sort_buffer_size = 1M [myisamchk] key_buffer = 1M sort_buffer_size = 1M [mysqlhotcopy] interactive-timeout So what is my silly error?

    Read the article

  • Mysqld increases the load on the CPU and drops after flush-tables

    - by mirage
    Help please advice on the issue. Normal load on the cpu 20-30% us + sy. After restoring the database files from the slave server (same version) began a periodic problem. mysql starts to load the cpu at 100% (us + sy grows proportionally). The queue is growing, everything slows down. But with mysqladmin flush-tables are normalized for a few hours. Dedicated linux server running mysql 2 x E5506 24Gb RAM, database size 50Gb. [OK] Currently running supported MySQL version 5.0.51a-24 + lenny4-log [OK] Operating on 64-bit architecture -------- Storage Engine Statistics --------------------------------------- ---- [-] Status: + Archive-BDB-Federated + InnoDB-ISAM-NDBCluster [-] Data in MyISAM tables: 33G (Tables: 1474) [-] Data in InnoDB tables: 1G (Tables: 4) [-] Data in MEMORY tables: 120K (Tables: 3) [-] Reads / Writes: 91% / 9% [-] Total buffers: 12.8M per thread and 7.1G global [OK] Maximum possible memory usage: 15.8G (66% of installed RAM) 4000 - 5500 rps key_buffer = 1536M max_allowed_packet = 2M table_cache = 4096 sort_buffer_size = 409584 read_buffer_size = 128K read_rnd_buffer_size = 8M myisam_sort_buffer_size = 64M thread_cache_size = 500 query_cache_size = 100M thread_concurrency = 24 max_connections = 700 tmp_table_size = 4096M join_buffer_size = 4M max_heap_table_size = 4096M query_cache_limit = 1M low_priority_updates = 1 concurrent_insert = 2 wait_timeout = 30 server-id = 1 log_bin = /var/log/mysql/mysql-bin.log expire_logs_days = 10 max_binlog_size = 100M innodb_buffer_pool_size = 1536M innodb_log_buffer_size = 4M innodb_flush_log_at_trx_commit = 2 How to solve the problem?

    Read the article

  • MySQL config for 2GB ram

    - by Tiffany Walker
    How is my config? Does it work well for 2GB? What would be an ideal config for a 2GB ram server? [mysqld] set-variable = max_connections=500 log-slow-queries safe-show-database local-infile=0 skip-networking symbolic-links=0 max_connections = 500 key_buffer = 256M myisam_sort_buffer_size = 64M join_buffer_size = 2M read_buffer_size = 2M sort_buffer_size = 2M read_rnd_buffer_size = 2M thread_concurrency = 16 table_cache = 1024 thread_cache_size = 50 wait_timeout = 7200 connect_timeout = 10 tmp_table_size = 32M max_allowed_packet = 160M max_connect_errors = 10 query_cache_limit = 1M query_cache_size = 32M query_cache_type = 1 [mysqld_safe] open_files_limit = 8192 [mysqldump] max_allowed_packet = 16M [myisamchk] key_buffer = 64M sort_buffer = 64M read_buffer = 16M write_buffer = 16M UPDATE 2012-03-28 12:58 EDT By RolandoMySQLDBA Please run these queries and paste them into your question: For MyISAM SELECT CONCAT(ROUND(KBS/POWER(1024, IF(PowerOf1024<0,0,IF(PowerOf1024>3,0,PowerOf1024)))+0.4999), SUBSTR(' KMG',IF(PowerOf1024<0,0, IF(PowerOf1024>3,0,PowerOf1024))+1,1)) recommended_key_buffer_size FROM (SELECT LEAST(POWER(2,32),KBS1) KBS FROM (SELECT SUM(index_length) KBS1 FROM information_schema.tables WHERE engine='MyISAM' AND table_schema NOT IN ('information_schema','mysql')) AA ) A, (SELECT 2 PowerOf1024) B; For InnoDB SELECT CONCAT(ROUND(KBS/POWER(1024, IF(PowerOf1024<0,0,IF(PowerOf1024>3,0,PowerOf1024)))+0.49999), SUBSTR(' KMG',IF(PowerOf1024<0,0, IF(PowerOf1024>3,0,PowerOf1024))+1,1)) recommended_innodb_buffer_pool_size FROM (SELECT SUM(data_length+index_length) KBS FROM information_schema.tables WHERE engine='InnoDB') A, (SELECT 2 PowerOf1024) B;

    Read the article

  • Can this Query be corrected or different table structure needed? (database dumps provided)

    - by sandeepan
    This is a bit lengthy but I have provided sufficient details and kept things very clear. Please see if you can help. (I will surely accept answer if it solves my problem) I am sure a person experienced with this can surely help or suggest me to decide the tables structure. About the system:- There are tutors who create classes A tags based search approach is being followed Tag relations are created/edited when new tutors registers/edits profile data and when tutors create classes (this makes tutors and classes searcheable).For simplicity, let us consider only tutor name and class name are the fields which are matched against search keywords. In this example, I am considering - tutor "Sandeepan Nath" has created a class called "first class" tutor "Bob Cratchit" has created a class called "new class" Desired search results- AND logic to be appied on the search keywords and match against class and tutor data(class name + tutor name), in other words, All those classes be shown such that all the search terms are present in the class name or its tutor name. Example to be clear - Searching "first class" returns class with id_wc = 1. Working Searching "Sandeepan class" should also return class with id_wc = 1. Not working in System 2. Problem with profile editing and searching To tell in one sentence, I am facing a conflict between the ease of profile edition (edition of tag relations when tutor profiles are edited) and the ease of search logic. In the beginning, we had one table structure and search was easy but tag edition logic was very clumsy and unmaintainable(Check System 1 in the section below) . So we created separate tag relations tables to make profile edition simpler but search has become difficult. Please dump the tables so that you can run the search query I have given below and see the results. System 1 (previous system - search easy - profile edition difficult):- Only one table called All_Tag_Relations table had the all the tag relations. The tags table below is common to both systems 1 and 2. CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `all_tag_relations` ( `id_tag_rel` int(10) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `id_tag` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL DEFAULT '0', `id_tutor` int(10) DEFAULT NULL, `id_wc` int(10) unsigned DEFAULT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id_tag_rel`), KEY `All_Tag_Relations_FKIndex1` (`id_tag`), KEY `id_wc` (`id_wc`), KEY `id_tag` (`id_tag`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1; INSERT INTO `all_tag_relations` (`id_tag_rel`, `id_tag`, `id_tutor`, `id_wc`) VALUES (1, 1, 1, NULL), (2, 2, 1, NULL), (3, 1, 1, 1), (4, 2, 1, 1), (5, 3, 1, 1), (6, 4, 1, 1), (7, 6, 2, NULL), (8, 7, 2, NULL), (9, 6, 2, 2), (10, 7, 2, 2), (11, 5, 2, 2), (12, 4, 2, 2); CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `tags` ( `id_tag` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `tag` varchar(255) DEFAULT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id_tag`), UNIQUE KEY `tag` (`tag`), KEY `id_tag` (`id_tag`), KEY `tag_2` (`tag`), KEY `tag_3` (`tag`), KEY `tag_4` (`tag`), FULLTEXT KEY `tag_5` (`tag`) ) ENGINE=MyISAM DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 AUTO_INCREMENT=8 ; INSERT INTO `tags` (`id_tag`, `tag`) VALUES (1, 'Sandeepan'), (2, 'Nath'), (3, 'first'), (4, 'class'), (5, 'new'), (6, 'Bob'), (7, 'Cratchit'); Please note that for every class, the tag rels of its tutor have to be duplicated. Example, for class with id_wc=1, the tag rel records with id_tag_rel = 3 and 4 are actually extras if you compare with the tag rel records with id_tag_rel = 1 and 2. System 2 (present system - profile edition easy, search difficult) Two separate tables Tutors_Tag_Relations and Webclasses_Tag_Relations have the corresponding tag relations data (Please dump into a separate database)- CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `tutors_tag_relations` ( `id_tag_rel` int(10) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `id_tag` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL DEFAULT '0', `id_tutor` int(10) DEFAULT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id_tag_rel`), KEY `All_Tag_Relations_FKIndex1` (`id_tag`), KEY `id_tag` (`id_tag`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1; INSERT INTO `tutors_tag_relations` (`id_tag_rel`, `id_tag`, `id_tutor`) VALUES (1, 1, 1), (2, 2, 1), (3, 6, 2), (4, 7, 2); CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `webclasses_tag_relations` ( `id_tag_rel` int(10) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `id_tag` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL DEFAULT '0', `id_tutor` int(10) DEFAULT NULL, `id_wc` int(10) DEFAULT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id_tag_rel`), KEY `webclasses_Tag_Relations_FKIndex1` (`id_tag`), KEY `id_wc` (`id_wc`), KEY `id_tag` (`id_tag`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1; INSERT INTO `webclasses_tag_relations` (`id_tag_rel`, `id_tag`, `id_tutor`, `id_wc`) VALUES (1, 3, 1, 1), (2, 4, 1, 1), (3, 5, 2, 2), (4, 4, 2, 2); CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `tags` ( `id_tag` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `tag` varchar(255) DEFAULT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id_tag`), UNIQUE KEY `tag` (`tag`), KEY `id_tag` (`id_tag`), KEY `tag_2` (`tag`), KEY `tag_3` (`tag`), KEY `tag_4` (`tag`), FULLTEXT KEY `tag_5` (`tag`) ) ENGINE=MyISAM DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 AUTO_INCREMENT=8 ; INSERT INTO `tags` (`id_tag`, `tag`) VALUES (1, 'Sandeepan'), (2, 'Nath'), (3, 'first'), (4, 'class'), (5, 'new'), (6, 'Bob'), (7, 'Cratchit'); CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `all_tag_relations` ( `id_tag_rel` int(10) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `id_tag` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL DEFAULT '0', `id_tutor` int(10) DEFAULT NULL, `id_wc` int(10) unsigned DEFAULT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id_tag_rel`), KEY `All_Tag_Relations_FKIndex1` (`id_tag`), KEY `id_wc` (`id_wc`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1; insert into All_Tag_Relations select NULL,id_tag,id_tutor,NULL from Tutors_Tag_Relations; insert into All_Tag_Relations select NULL,id_tag,id_tutor,id_wc from Webclasses_Tag_Relations; Here you can see how easily tutor first name can be edited only in one place. But search has become really difficult, so on being advised to use a Temporary table, I am creating one at every search request, then dumping all the necessary data and then searching from it, I am creating this All_Tag_Relations table at search run time. Here I am just dumping all the data from the two tables Tutors_Tag_Relations and Webclasses_Tag_Relations. But, I am still not able to get classes if I search with tutor name This is the query which searches "first class". Running them on both the systems shows correct results (returns the class with id_wc = 1). SELECT wtagrels.id_wc,SUM(DISTINCT( wtagrels.id_tag =3)) AS key_1_total_matches, SUM(DISTINCT( wtagrels.id_tag =4)) AS key_2_total_matches FROM all_tag_relations AS wtagrels WHERE ( wtagrels.id_tag =3 OR wtagrels.id_tag =4 ) GROUP BY wtagrels.id_wc HAVING key_1_total_matches = 1 AND key_2_total_matches = 1 LIMIT 0, 20 But, searching for "Sandeepan class" works only with the 1st system Here is the query which searches "Sandeepan class" SELECT wtagrels.id_wc,SUM(DISTINCT( wtagrels.id_tag =1)) AS key_1_total_matches, SUM(DISTINCT( wtagrels.id_tag =4)) AS key_2_total_matches FROM all_tag_relations AS wtagrels WHERE ( wtagrels.id_tag =1 OR wtagrels.id_tag =4 ) GROUP BY wtagrels.id_wc HAVING key_1_total_matches = 1 AND key_2_total_matches = 1 LIMIT 0, 20 Can anybody alter this query and somehow do a proper join or something to get correct results. That solves my problem in a nice way. As you can figure out, the reason why it does not work in system 2 is that in system 1, for every class, one additional tag relation linking class and tutor name is present. e.g. for class first class, (records with id_tag_rel 3 and 4) which returns the class on searching with tutor name. So, you see the trade-off between the search and profile edition difficulty with the two systems. How do I overcome both. I have to reach a conclusion soon. So far my reasoning is it is definitely not good from a code maintainability point of view to follow the single tag rel table structure of system one, because in a real system while editing a field like "tutor qualifications", there can be as many records in tag rels table as there are words in qualification of a tutor (one word in a field = one tag relation). Now suppose a tutor has 100 classes. When he edits his qualification, all the tag rel rows corresponding to him are deleted and then as many copies are to be created (as per the new qualification data) as there are classes. This becomes particularly difficult if later more searcheable fields are added. The code cannot be robust. Is the best solution to follow system 2 (edition has to be in one table - no extra work for each and every class) and somehow re-create the all_tag_relations table like system 1 (from the tables tutor_tag_relations and webclasses_tag_relations), creating the extra tutor tag rels for each and every class by a tutor (which is currently missing in system 2's temporary all_tag_relations table). That would be a time consuming logic script. I doubt that table can be recreated without resorting to PHP sript (mysql alone cannot do that). But the problem is that running all this at search time will make search definitely slow. So, how do such systems work? How are such situations handled? I thought about we can run a cron which initiates that PHP script, say every 1 minute and replaces the existing all_tag_relations table as per new tag rels from tutor_tag_relations and webclasses_tag_relations (replaces means creates a new table, deletes the original and renames the new one as all_tag_relations, otherwise search won't work during that period- or is there any better way to that?). Anyway, the result would be that any changes by tutors will reflect in search in the next 1 minute and not immediately. An alternateve would be to initate that PHP script every time a tutor edits his profile. But here again, since many users may edit their profiles concurrently, will the creation of so many tables be a burden and can mysql make the server slow? Any help would be appreciated and working solution will be accepted as answer. Thanks, Sandeepan

    Read the article

  • Can this Query can be corrected or different table structure needed? (question is clear, detailed, d

    - by sandeepan
    This is a bit lengthy but I have provided sufficient details and kept things very clear. Please see if you can help. (I will surely accept answer if it solves my problem) I am sure a person experienced with this can surely help or suggest me to decide the tables structure. About the system:- There are tutors who create classes A tags based search approach is being followed Tag relations are created/edited when new tutors registers/edits profile data and when tutors create classes (this makes tutors and classes searcheable).For simplicity, let us consider only tutor name and class name are the fields which are matched against search keywords. In this example, I am considering - tutor "Sandeepan Nath" has created a class called "first class" tutor "Bob Cratchit" has created a class called "new class" Desired search results- AND logic to be appied on the search keywords and match against class and tutor data(class name + tutor name), in other words, All those classes be shown such that all the search terms are present in the class name or its tutor name. Example to be clear - Searching "first class" returns class with id_wc = 1. Working Searching "Sandeepan class" should also return class with id_wc = 1. Not working in System 2. Problem with profile editing and searching To tell in one sentence, I am facing a conflict between the ease of profile edition (edition of tag relations when tutor profiles are edited) and the ease of search logic. In the beginning, we had one table structure and search was easy but tag edition logic was very clumsy and unmaintainable(Check System 1 in the section below) . So we created separate tag relations tables to make profile edition simpler but search has become difficult. Please dump the tables so that you can run the search query I have given below and see the results. System 1 (previous system - search easy - profile edition difficult):- Only one table called All_Tag_Relations table had the all the tag relations. The tags table below is common to both systems 1 and 2. CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `all_tag_relations` ( `id_tag_rel` int(10) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `id_tag` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL DEFAULT '0', `id_tutor` int(10) DEFAULT NULL, `id_wc` int(10) unsigned DEFAULT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id_tag_rel`), KEY `All_Tag_Relations_FKIndex1` (`id_tag`), KEY `id_wc` (`id_wc`), KEY `id_tag` (`id_tag`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1; INSERT INTO `all_tag_relations` (`id_tag_rel`, `id_tag`, `id_tutor`, `id_wc`) VALUES (1, 1, 1, NULL), (2, 2, 1, NULL), (3, 1, 1, 1), (4, 2, 1, 1), (5, 3, 1, 1), (6, 4, 1, 1), (7, 6, 2, NULL), (8, 7, 2, NULL), (9, 6, 2, 2), (10, 7, 2, 2), (11, 5, 2, 2), (12, 4, 2, 2); CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `tags` ( `id_tag` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `tag` varchar(255) DEFAULT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id_tag`), UNIQUE KEY `tag` (`tag`), KEY `id_tag` (`id_tag`), KEY `tag_2` (`tag`), KEY `tag_3` (`tag`), KEY `tag_4` (`tag`), FULLTEXT KEY `tag_5` (`tag`) ) ENGINE=MyISAM DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 AUTO_INCREMENT=8 ; INSERT INTO `tags` (`id_tag`, `tag`) VALUES (1, 'Sandeepan'), (2, 'Nath'), (3, 'first'), (4, 'class'), (5, 'new'), (6, 'Bob'), (7, 'Cratchit'); Please note that for every class, the tag rels of its tutor have to be duplicated. Example, for class with id_wc=1, the tag rel records with id_tag_rel = 3 and 4 are actually extras if you compare with the tag rel records with id_tag_rel = 1 and 2. System 2 (present system - profile edition easy, search difficult) Two separate tables Tutors_Tag_Relations and Webclasses_Tag_Relations have the corresponding tag relations data (Please dump into a separate database)- CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `tutors_tag_relations` ( `id_tag_rel` int(10) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `id_tag` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL DEFAULT '0', `id_tutor` int(10) DEFAULT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id_tag_rel`), KEY `All_Tag_Relations_FKIndex1` (`id_tag`), KEY `id_tag` (`id_tag`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1; INSERT INTO `tutors_tag_relations` (`id_tag_rel`, `id_tag`, `id_tutor`) VALUES (1, 1, 1), (2, 2, 1), (3, 6, 2), (4, 7, 2); CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `webclasses_tag_relations` ( `id_tag_rel` int(10) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `id_tag` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL DEFAULT '0', `id_tutor` int(10) DEFAULT NULL, `id_wc` int(10) DEFAULT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id_tag_rel`), KEY `webclasses_Tag_Relations_FKIndex1` (`id_tag`), KEY `id_wc` (`id_wc`), KEY `id_tag` (`id_tag`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1; INSERT INTO `webclasses_tag_relations` (`id_tag_rel`, `id_tag`, `id_tutor`, `id_wc`) VALUES (1, 3, 1, 1), (2, 4, 1, 1), (3, 5, 2, 2), (4, 4, 2, 2); CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `tags` ( `id_tag` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `tag` varchar(255) DEFAULT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id_tag`), UNIQUE KEY `tag` (`tag`), KEY `id_tag` (`id_tag`), KEY `tag_2` (`tag`), KEY `tag_3` (`tag`), KEY `tag_4` (`tag`), FULLTEXT KEY `tag_5` (`tag`) ) ENGINE=MyISAM DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 AUTO_INCREMENT=8 ; INSERT INTO `tags` (`id_tag`, `tag`) VALUES (1, 'Sandeepan'), (2, 'Nath'), (3, 'first'), (4, 'class'), (5, 'new'), (6, 'Bob'), (7, 'Cratchit'); CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `all_tag_relations` ( `id_tag_rel` int(10) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `id_tag` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL DEFAULT '0', `id_tutor` int(10) DEFAULT NULL, `id_wc` int(10) unsigned DEFAULT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id_tag_rel`), KEY `All_Tag_Relations_FKIndex1` (`id_tag`), KEY `id_wc` (`id_wc`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1; insert into All_Tag_Relations select NULL,id_tag,id_tutor,NULL from Tutors_Tag_Relations; insert into All_Tag_Relations select NULL,id_tag,id_tutor,id_wc from Webclasses_Tag_Relations; Here you can see how easily tutor first name can be edited only in one place. But search has become really difficult, so on being advised to use a Temporary table, I am creating one at every search request, then dumping all the necessary data and then searching from it, I am creating this All_Tag_Relations table at search run time. Here I am just dumping all the data from the two tables Tutors_Tag_Relations and Webclasses_Tag_Relations. But, I am still not able to get classes if I search with tutor name This is the query which searches "first class". Running them on both the systems shows correct results (returns the class with id_wc = 1). SELECT wtagrels.id_wc,SUM(DISTINCT( wtagrels.id_tag =3)) AS key_1_total_matches, SUM(DISTINCT( wtagrels.id_tag =4)) AS key_2_total_matches FROM all_tag_relations AS wtagrels WHERE ( wtagrels.id_tag =3 OR wtagrels.id_tag =4 ) GROUP BY wtagrels.id_wc HAVING key_1_total_matches = 1 AND key_2_total_matches = 1 LIMIT 0, 20 But, searching for "Sandeepan class" works only with the 1st system Here is the query which searches "Sandeepan class" SELECT wtagrels.id_wc,SUM(DISTINCT( wtagrels.id_tag =1)) AS key_1_total_matches, SUM(DISTINCT( wtagrels.id_tag =4)) AS key_2_total_matches FROM all_tag_relations AS wtagrels WHERE ( wtagrels.id_tag =1 OR wtagrels.id_tag =4 ) GROUP BY wtagrels.id_wc HAVING key_1_total_matches = 1 AND key_2_total_matches = 1 LIMIT 0, 20 Can anybody alter this query and somehow do a proper join or something to get correct results. That solves my problem in a nice way. As you can figure out, the reason why it does not work in system 2 is that in system 1, for every class, one additional tag relation linking class and tutor name is present. e.g. for class first class, (records with id_tag_rel 3 and 4) which returns the class on searching with tutor name. So, you see the trade-off between the search and profile edition difficulty with the two systems. How do I overcome both. I have to reach a conclusion soon. So far my reasoning is it is definitely not good from a code maintainability point of view to follow the single tag rel table structure of system one, because in a real system while editing a field like "tutor qualifications", there can be as many records in tag rels table as there are words in qualification of a tutor (one word in a field = one tag relation). Now suppose a tutor has 100 classes. When he edits his qualification, all the tag rel rows corresponding to him are deleted and then as many copies are to be created (as per the new qualification data) as there are classes. This becomes particularly difficult if later more searcheable fields are added. The code cannot be robust. Is the best solution to follow system 2 (edition has to be in one table - no extra work for each and every class) and somehow re-create the all_tag_relations table like system 1 (from the tables tutor_tag_relations and webclasses_tag_relations), creating the extra tutor tag rels for each and every class by a tutor (which is currently missing in system 2's temporary all_tag_relations table). That would be a time consuming logic script. I doubt that table can be recreated without resorting to PHP sript (mysql alone cannot do that). But the problem is that running all this at search time will make search definitely slow. So, how do such systems work? How are such situations handled? I thought about we can run a cron which initiates that PHP script, say every 1 minute and replaces the existing all_tag_relations table as per new tag rels from tutor_tag_relations and webclasses_tag_relations (replaces means creates a new table, deletes the original and renames the new one as all_tag_relations, otherwise search won't work during that period- or is there any better way to that?). Anyway, the result would be that any changes by tutors will reflect in search in the next 1 minute and not immediately. An alternateve would be to initate that PHP script every time a tutor edits his profile. But here again, since many users may edit their profiles concurrently, will the creation of so many tables be a burden and can mysql make the server slow? Any help would be appreciated and working solution will be accepted as answer. Thanks, Sandeepan

    Read the article

  • MySQL "ERROR 1005 (HY000): Can't create table 'foo.#sql-12c_4' (errno: 150)"

    - by Ankur Banerjee
    Hi, I was working on creating some tables in database foo, but every time I end up with errno 150 regarding the foreign key. Firstly, here's my code for creating tables: CREATE TABLE Clients ( client_id CHAR(10) NOT NULL , client_name CHAR(50) NOT NULL , provisional_license_num CHAR(50) NOT NULL , client_address CHAR(50) NULL , client_city CHAR(50) NULL , client_county CHAR(50) NULL , client_zip CHAR(10) NULL , client_phone INT NULL , client_email CHAR(255) NULL , client_dob DATETIME NULL , test_attempts INT NULL ); CREATE TABLE Applications ( application_id CHAR(10) NOT NULL , office_id INT NOT NULL , client_id CHAR(10) NOT NULL , instructor_id CHAR(10) NOT NULL , car_id CHAR(10) NOT NULL , application_date DATETIME NULL ); CREATE TABLE Instructors ( instructor_id CHAR(10) NOT NULL , office_id INT NOT NULL , instructor_name CHAR(50) NOT NULL , instructor_address CHAR(50) NULL , instructor_city CHAR(50) NULL , instructor_county CHAR(50) NULL , instructor_zip CHAR(10) NULL , instructor_phone INT NULL , instructor_email CHAR(255) NULL , instructor_dob DATETIME NULL , lessons_given INT NULL ); CREATE TABLE Cars ( car_id CHAR(10) NOT NULL , office_id INT NOT NULL , engine_serial_num CHAR(10) NULL , registration_num CHAR(10) NULL , car_make CHAR(50) NULL , car_model CHAR(50) NULL ); CREATE TABLE Offices ( office_id INT NOT NULL , office_address CHAR(50) NULL , office_city CHAR(50) NULL , office_County CHAR(50) NULL , office_zip CHAR(10) NULL , office_phone INT NULL , office_email CHAR(255) NULL ); CREATE TABLE Lessons ( lesson_num INT NOT NULL , client_id CHAR(10) NOT NULL , date DATETIME NOT NULL , time DATETIME NOT NULL , milegage_used DECIMAL(5, 2) NULL , progress CHAR(50) NULL ); CREATE TABLE DrivingTests ( test_num INT NOT NULL , client_id CHAR(10) NOT NULL , test_date DATETIME NOT NULL , seat_num INT NOT NULL , score INT NULL , test_notes CHAR(255) NULL ); ALTER TABLE Clients ADD PRIMARY KEY (client_id); ALTER TABLE Applications ADD PRIMARY KEY (application_id); ALTER TABLE Instructors ADD PRIMARY KEY (instructor_id); ALTER TABLE Offices ADD PRIMARY KEY (office_id); ALTER TABLE Lessons ADD PRIMARY KEY (lesson_num); ALTER TABLE DrivingTests ADD PRIMARY KEY (test_num); ALTER TABLE Applications ADD CONSTRAINT FK_Applications_Offices FOREIGN KEY (office_id) REFERENCES Offices (office_id); ALTER TABLE Applications ADD CONSTRAINT FK_Applications_Clients FOREIGN KEY (client_id) REFERENCES Clients (client_id); ALTER TABLE Applications ADD CONSTRAINT FK_Applications_Instructors FOREIGN KEY (instructor_id) REFERENCES Instructors (instructor_id); ALTER TABLE Applications ADD CONSTRAINT FK_Applications_Cars FOREIGN KEY (car_id) REFERENCES Cars (car_id); ALTER TABLE Lessons ADD CONSTRAINT FK_Lessons_Clients FOREIGN KEY (client_id) REFERENCES Clients (client_id); ALTER TABLE Cars ADD CONSTRAINT FK_Cars_Offices FOREIGN KEY (office_id) REFERENCES Offices (office_id); ALTER TABLE Clients ADD CONSTRAINT FK_DrivingTests_Clients FOREIGN KEY (client_id) REFERENCES Clients (client_id); These are the errors that I get: mysql> ALTER TABLE Applications ADD CONSTRAINT FK_Applications_Cars FOREIGN KEY (car_id) REFERENCES Cars (car_id); ERROR 1005 (HY000): Can't create table 'foo.#sql-12c_4' (errno: 150) I ran SHOW ENGINE INNODB STATUS which gives a more detailed error description: ------------------------ LATEST FOREIGN KEY ERROR ------------------------ 100509 20:59:49 Error in foreign key constraint of table practice9/#sql-12c_4: FOREIGN KEY (car_id) REFERENCES Cars (car_id): Cannot find an index in the referenced table where the referenced columns appear as the first columns, or column types in the table and the referenced table do not match for constraint. Note that the internal storage type of ENUM and SET changed in tables created with >= InnoDB-4.1.12, and such columns in old tables cannot be referenced by such columns in new tables. See http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/innodb-foreign-key-constraints.html for correct foreign key definition. ------------ I searched around on StackOverflow and elsewhere online - came across a helpful blog post here with pointers on how to resolve this error - but I can't figure out what's going wrong. Any help would be appreciated!

    Read the article

  • FairWarning Privacy Monitoring Solutions Rely on MySQL to Secure Patient Data

    - by Rebecca Hansen
    FairWarning® solutions have audited well over 120 billion events, each of which was processed and stored in a MySQL database. FairWarning is the world's leading supplier of privacy monitoring solutions for electronic health records, relied on by over 1,200 Hospitals and 5,000 Clinics to keep their patients' data safe. In January 2014, FairWarning was awarded the highest commendation in healthcare IT as the first ever Category Leader for Patient Privacy Monitoring in the "2013 Best in KLAS: Software & Services" report[1]. FairWarning has used MySQL as their solutions’ database from their start in 2005 to worldwide expansion and market leadership. FairWarning recently migrated their solutions from MyISAM to InnoDB and updated from MySQL 5.5 to 5.6. Following are some of benefits they’ve had as a result of those changes and reasons for their continued reliance on MySQL (from FairWarning MySQL Case Study). Scalability to Handle Terabytes of Data FairWarning's customers have a lot of data: On average, FairWarning customers receive over 700,000 events to be processed daily. Over 25% of their customers receive over 30 million events per day, which equates to over 1 billion events and nearly one terabyte (TB) of new data each month. Databases range in size from a few hundred GBs to 10+ TBs for enterprise deployments (data are rolled off after 13 months). Low or Zero Admin = Few DBAs "MySQL has not required a lot of administration. After it's been tuned, configured, and optimized for size on initial setup, we have very low administrative costs. I can scale and add more customers without adding DBAs. This has had a big, positive impact on our business.” - Chris Arnold, FairWarning Vice President of Product Management and Engineering. Performance Schema  As the size of FairWarning's customers has increased, so have their tables and data volumes. MySQL 5.6’ new maintenance and management features have helped FairWarning keep up. In particular, MySQL 5.6 performance schema’s low-level metrics have provided critical insight into how the system is performing and why. Support for Mutli-CPU Threads MySQL 5.6' support for multiple concurrent CPU threads, and FairWarning's custom data loader allow multiple files to load into a single table simultaneously vs. one at a time. As a result, their data load time has been reduced by 500%. MySQL Enterprise Hot Backup Because hospitals and clinics never stop, FairWarning solutions can’t either. FairWarning changed from using mysqldump to MySQL Enterprise Hot Backup, which has reduced downtime, restore time, and storage requirements. For many of their larger customers, restore time has decreased by 80%. MySQL Enterprise Edition and Product Roadmap Provide Complete Solution "MySQL's product roadmap fully addresses our needs. We like the fact that MySQL Enterprise Edition has everything included; there's no need to purchase separate modules."  - Chris Arnold Learn More>> FairWarning MySQL Case Study Why MySQL 5.6 is an Even Better Embedded Database for Your Products presentation Updating Your Products to MySQL 5.6, Best Practices for OEMs on-demand webinar (audio and / or slides + Q&A transcript) MyISAM to InnoDB – Why and How on-demand webinar (same stuff) Top 10 Reasons to Use MySQL as an Embedded Database white paper [1] 2013 Best in KLAS: Software & Services report, January, 2014. © 2014 KLAS Enterprises, LLC. All rights reserved.

    Read the article

  • MySql Connector/NET 6.7.4 GA has been released

    - by fernando
    MySQL Connector/Net 6.7.4, a new version of the all-managed .NET driver for MySQL has been released.  This is the GA, is feature complete. It is recommended for production environments.  It is appropriate for use with MySQL server versions 5.0-5.7.  It is now available in source and binary form from http://dev.mysql.com/downloads/connector/net/#downloads and mirror sites (note that not all mirror sites may be up to date at this point-if you can't find this version on some mirror, please try again later or choose another download site.) The 6.7 version of MySQL Connector/Net brings the following new features: -  WinRT Connector. -  Load Balancing support. -  Entity Framework 5.0 support. -  Memcached support for Innodb Memcached plugin. -  This version also splits the product in two: from now on, starting version 6.7, Connector/NET will include only the former Connector/NET ADO.NET driver, Entity Framework and ASP.NET providers (Core libraries of MySql.Data, MySql.Data.Entity & MySql.Web). While all the former product Visual Studio integration (Design support, Intellisense, Debugger) are available as part of MySql Windows Installer under the name "MySql for Visual Studio".  WinRT Connector  ------------------------------------------- Now you can write MySql data access apps in Windows Runtime (aka Store Apps) using the familiar API of Connector/NET for .NET.  Load Balancing Support  -------------------------------------------  Now you can setup a Replication or Cluster configuration in the backend, and Connector/NET will balance the load of queries among all servers making up the backend topology.  Entity Framework 5.0  -------------------------------------------  Connector/NET is now compatible with EF 5, including special features of EF 5 like spatial types.  Memcached  -------------------------------------------  Just setup Innodb memcached plugin and use Connector/NET new APIs to establish a client to MySql 5.6 server's memcached daemon.  Bug fixes included in this release: - Fix for Entity Framework when inserts data having Identity columns (Oracle bug #16494585). - Fix for Connector/NET cannot read data from a MySql table using UTF-16/UTF-32 (MySql bug #69169, Oracle bug #16776818). - Fix for Malformed query in Entity Framework when eager loading due to multiple projections (MySql bug #67183, Oracle bug #16872852). - Fix for database objects with 'dbo' prefix when using automatic migrations in Entity Framework 5.0 (Oracle bug #16909439). - Fix for bug IIS application pool reset worker process causes website to crash (Oracle bug #16909237, Mysql Bug #67665). - Fix for bug Error in LINQ to Entities query when using Distinct().Count() (MySql Bug #68513, Oracle bug #16950146). - Fix for occasionally return no data when socket connection is slow, interrupted or delayed (MySql bug #69039, Oracle bug #16950212). - Fix for ConstraintException when filling a datatable (MySql bug #65065, Oracle bug #16952323). - Fix for Data Provider is not found after uninstalling Mysql for visual studio (Oracle bug #16973456). - Fix for nested sql generated for LINQ to Entities query with Take and Order by (MySql bug #65723, Oracle bug #16973939). The documentation is available at http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.7/en/connector-net.html  Enjoy and thanks for the support!  --  Fernando Gonzalez Sanchez | Software Engineer |  Oracle MySQL Windows Experience Team, Connector/NET  Guadalajara | Jalisco | Mexico 

    Read the article

  • How to override ATTR_DEFAULT_IDENTIFIER_OPTIONS in Models in Doctrine?

    - by user309083
    Here someone explained that setting a 'primary' attribute for any row in your Model will override Doctrine_Manager's ATTR_DEFAULT_IDENTIFIER_OPTIONS attribute: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2040675/how-do-you-override-a-constant-in-doctrines-models This works, however if you have a many to many relation whereby the intermediate table is created, even if you have set both columns in the intermediate to primary an error still results when Doctrine tries to place an index on the nonexistant 'id' column upon table creation. Here's my code: //Bootstrap // set the default primary key to be named 'id', integer, 4 bytes Doctrine_Manager::getInstance()->setAttribute( Doctrine_Core::ATTR_DEFAULT_IDENTIFIER_OPTIONS, array('name' => 'id', 'type' => 'integer', 'length' => 4)); //User Model class User extends Doctrine_Record { public function setTableDefinition() { $this->setTableName('users'); } public function setUp() { $this->hasMany('Role as roles', array( 'local' => 'id', 'foreign' => 'user_id', 'refClass' => 'UserRole', 'onDelete' => 'CASCADE' )); } } //Role Model class Role extends Doctrine_Record { public function setTableDefinition() { $this->setTableName('roles'); } public function setUp() { $this->hasMany('User as users', array( 'local' => 'id', 'foreign' => 'role_id', 'refClass' => 'UserRole' )); } } //UserRole Model class UserRole extends Doctrine_Record { public function setTableDefinition() { $this->setTableName('roles_users'); $this->hasColumn('user_id', 'integer', 4, array('primary'=>true)); $this->hasColumn('role_id', 'integer', 4, array('primary'=>true)); } } Resulting error: SQLSTATE[42000]: Syntax error or access violation: 1072 Key column 'id' doesn't exist in table. Failing Query: "CREATE TABLE roles_users (user_id INT UNSIGNED NOT NULL, role_id INT UNSIGNED NOT NULL, INDEX id_idx (id), PRIMARY KEY(user_id, role_id)) ENGINE = INNODB". Failing Query: CREATE TABLE roles_users (user_id INT UNSIGNED NOT NULL, role_id INT UNSIGNED NOT NULL, INDEX id_idx (id), PRIMARY KEY(user_id, role_id)) ENGINE = INNODB I'm creating my tables using Doctrine::createTablesFromModels();

    Read the article

  • Is this possible to join tables in doctrine ORM without using relations?

    - by piemesons
    Suppose there are two tables. Table X-- Columns: id x_value Table Y-- Columns: id x_id y_value Now I dont want to define relationship in doctrine classes and i want to retrieve some records using these two tables using a query like this: Select x_value from x, y where y.id="variable_z" and x.id=y.x_id; I m not able to figure out how to write query like this in doctrine orm EDIT: Table structures: Table 1: CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `image` ( `id` int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `random_name` varchar(255) NOT NULL, `user_id` int(11) NOT NULL, `community_id` int(11) NOT NULL, `published` varchar(1) NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 AUTO_INCREMENT=259 ; Table 2: CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `users` ( `id` int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `city` varchar(20) DEFAULT NULL, `state` varchar(20) DEFAULT NULL, `school` varchar(50) DEFAULT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 AUTO_INCREMENT=20 ; Query I am using: $q = new Doctrine_RawSql(); $q ->select('{u.*}, {img.*}') ->from('users u LEFT JOIN image img ON u.id = img.user_id') ->addComponent('u', 'Users u') ->addComponent('img', 'u.Image img') ->where("img.community_id='$community_id' AND img.published='y' AND u.state='$state' AND u.city='$city ->orderBy('img.id DESC') ->limit($count+12) ->execute(); Error I am getting: Fatal error: Uncaught exception 'Doctrine_Exception' with message 'Couldn't find class u' in C:\xampp\htdocs\fanyer\doctrine\lib\Doctrine\Table.php:290 Stack trace: #0 C:\xampp\htdocs\fanyer\doctrine\lib\Doctrine\Table.php(240): Doctrine_Table- >initDefinition() #1 C:\xampp\htdocs\fanyer\doctrine\lib\Doctrine\Connection.php(1127): Doctrine_Table->__construct('u', Object(Doctrine_Connection_Mysql), true) #2 C:\xampp\htdocs\fanyer\doctrine\lib\Doctrine\RawSql.php(425): Doctrine_Connection- >getTable('u') #3 C:\xampp\htdocs\fanyer\doctrine\models\Image.php(33): Doctrine_RawSql- >addComponent('img', 'u.Image imga') #4 C:\xampp\htdocs\fanyer\community_images.php(31): Image->get_community_images_gallery_filter(4, 0, 'AL', 'ALBERTVILLE') #5 {main} thrown in C:\xampp\htdocs\fanyer\doctrine\lib\Doctrine\Table.php on line 290

    Read the article

  • Mysql - Help me alter this search query to get desired results

    - by sandeepan-nath
    Following is a dump of the tables and data needed to answer understand the system:- The system consists of tutors and classes. The data in the table All_Tag_Relations stores tag relations for each tutor registered and each class created by a tutor. The tag relations are used for searching classes. CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `Tags` ( `id_tag` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL auto_increment, `tag` varchar(255) default NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id_tag`), UNIQUE KEY `tag` (`tag`), KEY `id_tag` (`id_tag`), KEY `tag_2` (`tag`), KEY `tag_3` (`tag`), KEY `tag_4` (`tag`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1; INSERT INTO `Tags` (`id_tag`, `tag`) VALUES (1, 'Sandeepan'), (2, 'Nath'), (3, 'first'), (4, 'class'), (5, 'new'), (6, 'Bob'), (7, 'Cratchit'); CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `All_Tag_Relations` ( `id_tag` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL default '0', `id_tutor` int(10) default NULL, `id_wc` int(10) unsigned default NULL, KEY `All_Tag_Relations_FKIndex1` (`id_tag`), KEY `id_wc` (`id_wc`), KEY `id_tag` (`id_tag`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1; INSERT INTO `All_Tag_Relations` (`id_tag`, `id_tutor`, `id_wc`) VALUES (1, 1, NULL), (2, 1, NULL), (3, 1, 1), (4, 1, 1), (6, 2, NULL), (7, 2, NULL), (5, 2, 2), (4, 2, 2); Following is my query:- This query searches for "first class" (tag for first = 3 and for class = 4, in Tags table) and returns all those classes such that both the terms first and class are present in the class name. SELECT wtagrels.id_wc,SUM(DISTINCT( wtagrels.id_tag =3)) AS key_1_total_matches, SUM(DISTINCT( wtagrels.id_tag =4)) AS key_2_total_matches FROM all_tag_relations AS wtagrels WHERE ( wtagrels.id_tag =3 OR wtagrels.id_tag =4 ) GROUP BY wtagrels.id_wc HAVING key_1_total_matches = 1 AND key_2_total_matches = 1 LIMIT 0, 20 And it returns the class with id_wc = 1. But, I want the search to show all those classes such that all the search terms are present in the class name or its tutor name So that searching "Sandeepan class" (wtagrels.id_tag = 1,4) or "Sandeepan Nath" also returns the class with id_wc=1. And Searching. Searching "Bob First" should not return any classes. Please modify the above query or suggest a new query, if possible using MyIsam - fulltext search, but somehow help me get the result.

    Read the article

  • Mysql Server Optimization

    - by Ish Kumar
    Hi Geeks, We are having serious MySQL(InnoDB) performance issues at a moment when we do: (10-20) insertions on TABLE1 (10-20) updates on TABLE2 Note: Both above operations happens within fraction of a second. And this occurs every few (10-15) minutes. And all online users (approx 400-600) doing read operation on join of TABLE1 & TABLE2 every 1 second. Here is our mysql configuration info: http://docs.google.com/View?id=dfrswh7c_117fmgcmb44 Issues: Lot queries wait and expire later (saw it from phpmyadmin / processes). My poor MySQL server crashes sometimes Questions Q1: Any suggestions to optimize at MySQL level? Q2: I thinking to use persistent connections at application level, is it right? Info Added Later: Database Engine: InnoDB TABLE1 : 400,000 rows (inserting 8,000 daily) & TABLE2: 8,000 rows 1 second query: SELECT b.id, b.user_id, b.description, b.debit, b.created, b.price, u.username, u.email, u.mobile FROM TABLE1 b, TABLE2 u WHERE b.credit = 0 AND b.user_id = u.id AND b.auction_id = "12345" ORDER BY b.id DESC LIMIT 10; // there are few more but they are not so critical. Indexing is good, we are using them wisely. In above query all id's are indexed And TABLE1 has frequent insertions and TABLE2 has frequent updates.

    Read the article

  • What are the hibernate annotations used to persist a value typed Map with an enumerated type as a ke

    - by Jason Novak
    I am having trouble getting the right hibernate annotations to use on a value typed Map with an enumerated class as a key. Here is a simplified (and extremely contrived) example. public class Thing { public String id; public Letter startLetter; public Map<Letter,Double> letterCounts = new HashMap<Letter, Double>(); } public enum Letter { A, B, C, D } Here are my current annotations on Thing @Entity public class Thing { @Id public String id; @Enumerated(EnumType.STRING) public Letter startLetter; @CollectionOfElements @JoinTable(name = "Thing_letterFrequencies", joinColumns = @JoinColumn(name = "thingId")) @MapKey(columns = @Column(name = "letter", nullable = false)) @Column(name = "count") public Map<Letter,Double> letterCounts = new HashMap<Letter, Double>(); } Hibernate generates the following DDL to create the tables for my MySql database create table Thing (id varchar(255) not null, startLetter varchar(255), primary key (id)) type=InnoDB; create table Thing_letterFrequencies (thingId varchar(255) not null, count double precision, letter tinyblob not null, primary key (thingId, letter)) type=InnoDB; Notice that hibernate tries to define letter (my map key) as a tinyblob, however it defines startLetter as a varchar(255) even though both are of the enumerated type Letter. When I try to create the tables I see the following error BLOB/TEXT column 'letter' used in key specification without a key length I googled this error and it appears that MySql has issues when you try to make a tinyblob column part of a primary key, which is what hibernate needs to do with the Thing_letterFrequencies table. So I would rather have letter mapped to a varchar(255) the way startLetter is. Unfortunately, I've been fussing with the MapKey annotation for a while now and haven't been able to make this work. I've also tried @MapKeyManyToMany(targetEntity=Product.class) without success. Can anyone tell me what are the correct annotations for my letterCounts map so that hibernate will treat the letterCounts map key the same way it does startLetter?

    Read the article

  • mysql and trigger usage question

    - by dhruvbird
    I have a situation in which I don't want inserts to take place (the transaction should rollback) if a certain condition is met. I could write this logic in the application code, but say for some reason, it has to be written in MySQL itself (say clients written in different languages will be inserting into this MySQL InnoDB table) [that's a separate discussion]. Table definition: CREATE TABLE table1(x int NOT NULL); The trigger looks something like this: CREATE TRIGGER t1 BEFORE INSERT ON table1 FOR EACH ROW IF (condition) THEN NEW.x = NULL; END IF; END; I am guessing it could also be written as(untested): CREATE TRIGGER t1 BEFORE INSERT ON table1 FOR EACH ROW IF (condition) THEN ROLLBACK; END IF; END; But, this doesn't work: CREATE TRIGGER t1 BEFORE INSERT ON table1 ROLLBACK; You are guaranteed that: Your DB will always be MySQL Table type will always be InnoDB That NOT NULL column will always stay the way it is Question: Do you see anything objectionable in the 1st method?

    Read the article

  • MySQL Paritioning performance

    - by Imran Pathan
    Measured performance on key partitioned tables and normal tables separately. But we couldn't find any performance improvement with partitioning. Queries are pruned. Using MySQL 5.1.47 on RHEL 4. Table details: UserUsage - Will have entries for user mobile number and data usage for each date. Mobile number and Date as PRI KEY. UserProfile - Queries prev table and stores summary for each mobile number. Mobile number PRI KEY. CREATE TABLE `UserUsage` ( `Msisdn` decimal(20,0) NOT NULL, `Date` date NOT NULL, . . PRIMARY KEY USING BTREE (`Msisdn`,`Date`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 PARTITION BY KEY(Msisdn) PARTITIONS 50; CREATE TABLE `UserProfile` ( `Msisdn` decimal(20,0) NOT NULL, . . PRIMARY KEY (`Msisdn`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 PARTITION BY KEY(Msisdn) PARTITIONS 50; Second table is updated by query select and order by date in first table in a perl program, query is select * from UserUsage where Msisdn=number order by Date desc limit 7 [Process data in perl] update UserProfile values(....) where Msisdn=number explain partition for select, shows row being scanned in a particular partition only. Is something wrong with partition design or queries as partitioning is taking almost same or more time compared to normal tables?

    Read the article

  • how to Solve the "Digg" problem in MongoDB

    - by user193116
    A while back,a Digg developer had posted this blog ,"http://about.digg.com/blog/looking-future-cassandra", where the he described one of the issues that were not optimally solved in MySQL. This was cited as one of the reasons for their move to Cassandra. I have been playing with MongoDB and I would like to understand how to implement the MongoDB collections for this problem From the article, the schema for this information in MySQL : CREATE TABLE Diggs ( id INT(11), itemid INT(11), userid INT(11), digdate DATETIME, PRIMARY KEY (id), KEY user (userid), KEY item (itemid) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8; CREATE TABLE Friends ( id INT(10) AUTO_INCREMENT, userid INT(10), username VARCHAR(15), friendid INT(10), friendname VARCHAR(15), mutual TINYINT(1), date_created DATETIME, PRIMARY KEY (id), UNIQUE KEY Friend_unique (userid,friendid), KEY Friend_friend (friendid) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8; This problem is ubiquitous in social networking scenario implementation. People befriend a lot of people and they in turn digg a lot of things. Quickly showing a user what his/her friends are up to is very critical. I understand that several blogs have since then provided a pure RDBMs solution with indexes for this issue; however I am curious as to how this could be solved in MongoDB.

    Read the article

  • Mysql slow query: INNER JOIN + ORDER BY causes filesort

    - by Alexander
    Hello! I'm trying to optimize this query: SELECT `posts`.* FROM `posts` INNER JOIN `posts_tags` ON `posts`.id = `posts_tags`.post_id WHERE (((`posts_tags`.tag_id = 1))) ORDER BY posts.created_at DESC; The size of tables is 38k rows, and 31k and mysql uses "filesort" so it gets pretty slow. I tried to use different indexes, no luck. CREATE TABLE `posts` ( `id` int(11) NOT NULL auto_increment, `created_at` datetime default NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id`), KEY `index_posts_on_created_at` (`created_at`), KEY `for_tags` (`trashed`,`published`,`clan_private`,`created_at`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB AUTO_INCREMENT=44390 DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8 COLLATE=utf8_unicode_ci CREATE TABLE `posts_tags` ( `id` int(11) NOT NULL auto_increment, `post_id` int(11) default NULL, `tag_id` int(11) default NULL, `created_at` datetime default NULL, `updated_at` datetime default NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id`), KEY `index_posts_tags_on_post_id_and_tag_id` (`post_id`,`tag_id`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB AUTO_INCREMENT=63175 DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8 +----+-------------+------------+--------+--------------------------+--------------------------+---------+---------------------+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+ | id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra | +----+-------------+------------+--------+--------------------------+--------------------------+---------+---------------------+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+ | 1 | SIMPLE | posts_tags | index | index_post_id_and_tag_id | index_post_id_and_tag_id | 10 | NULL | 24159 | Using where; Using index; Using temporary; Using filesort | | 1 | SIMPLE | posts | eq_ref | PRIMARY | PRIMARY | 4 | .posts_tags.post_id | 1 | | +----+-------------+------------+--------+--------------------------+--------------------------+---------+---------------------+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+ 2 rows in set (0.00 sec) What kind of index I need to define to avoid mysql using filesort? Is it possible when order field is not in where clause?

    Read the article

  • Suggestion on Database structure for relational data

    - by miccet
    Hi there. I've been wrestling with this problem for quite a while now and the automatic mails with 'Slow Query' warnings are still popping in. Basically, I have Blogs with a corresponding table as well as a table that keeps track of how many times each Blog has been viewed. This last table has a huge amount of records since this page is relatively high traffic and it logs every hit as an individual row. I have tried with indexes on the fields that are included in the WHERE clause, but it doesn't seem to help. I have also tried to clean the table each week by removing old ( 1.weeks) records. SO, I'm asking you guys, how would you solve this? The query that I know is causing the slowness is generated by Rails and looks like this: SELECT count(*) AS count_all FROM blog_views WHERE (created_at >= '2010-01-01 00:00:01' AND blog_id = 1); The tables have the following structures: CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS 'blogs' ( 'id' int(11) NOT NULL auto_increment, 'name' varchar(255) default NULL, 'perma_name' varchar(255) default NULL, 'author_id' int(11) default NULL, 'created_at' datetime default NULL, 'updated_at' datetime default NULL, 'blog_picture_id' int(11) default NULL, 'blog_picture2_id' int(11) default NULL, 'page_id' int(11) default NULL, 'blog_picture3_id' int(11) default NULL, 'active' tinyint(1) default '1', PRIMARY KEY ('id'), KEY 'index_blogs_on_author_id' ('author_id') ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8 AUTO_INCREMENT=1 ; And CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS 'blog_views' ( 'id' int(11) NOT NULL auto_increment, 'blog_id' int(11) default NULL, 'ip' varchar(255) default NULL, 'created_at' datetime default NULL, 'updated_at' datetime default NULL, PRIMARY KEY ('id'), KEY 'index_blog_views_on_blog_id' ('blog_id'), KEY 'created_at' ('created_at') ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8 AUTO_INCREMENT=1 ;

    Read the article

  • symfony + doctrine + inheritance, how to make them work?

    - by imac
    I am beginning to work with Symfony, I've found some documentation about inheritance. But also found this discouraging article, which make me doubt if Doctrine handles inheritance any good at all... Has anyone find a smart solution for inheritance in Symfony+Doctrine? As an example, I have already structured the database something like this: CREATE TABLE `poster` ( `poster_id` int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `user_name` varchar(50) NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`poster_id`), UNIQUE KEY `id` (`poster_id`), ) ENGINE=InnoDB AUTO_INCREMENT=3 DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1; CREATE TABLE `user` ( `user_id` int(11) NOT NULL, `real_name` varchar(50) DEFAULT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`user_id`), UNIQUE KEY `user_id` (`user_id`), CONSTRAINT `user_fk` FOREIGN KEY (`user_id`) REFERENCES `poster` (`poster_id`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1; From that, Doctrine generated this "schema.yml": Poster: connection: doctrine tableName: poster columns: poster_id: type: integer(4) fixed: false unsigned: false primary: true autoincrement: true user_name: type: string(50) fixed: false unsigned: false primary: false notnull: true autoincrement: false relations: Post: local: poster_id foreign: poster_id type: many User: local: poster_id foreign: user_id type: many Version: local: poster_id foreign: poster_id type: many User: connection: doctrine tableName: user columns: user_id: type: integer(4) fixed: false unsigned: false primary: true autoincrement: false real_name: type: string(50) fixed: false unsigned: false primary: false notnull: false autoincrement: false relations: Poster: local: user_id foreign: poster_id type: one User creation for this structure with Doctrine auto-generated forms does not work. Any clue will be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • What are the hibernate annotations used to persist a Map with an enumerated type as a key?

    - by Jason Novak
    I am having trouble getting the right hibernate annotations to use on a Map with an enumerated class as a key. Here is a simplified (and extremely contrived) example. public class Thing { public String id; public Letter startLetter; public Map<Letter,Double> letterCounts = new HashMap<Letter, Double>(); } public enum Letter { A, B, C, D } Here are my current annotations on Thing @Entity public class Thing { @Id public String id; @Enumerated(EnumType.STRING) public Letter startLetter; @CollectionOfElements @JoinTable(name = "Thing_letterFrequencies", joinColumns = @JoinColumn(name = "thingId")) @MapKey(columns = @Column(name = "letter", nullable = false)) @Column(name = "count") public Map<Letter,Double> letterCounts = new HashMap<Letter, Double>(); } Hibernate generates the following DDL to create the tables for my MySql database create table Thing (id varchar(255) not null, startLetter varchar(255), primary key (id)) type=InnoDB; create table Thing_letterFrequencies (thingId varchar(255) not null, count double precision, letter tinyblob not null, primary key (thingId, letter)) type=InnoDB; Notice that hibernate tries to define letter (my map key) as a tinyblob, however it defines startLetter as a varchar(255) even though both are of the enumerated type Letter. When I try to create the tables I see the following error BLOB/TEXT column 'letter' used in key specification without a key length I googled this error and it appears that MySql has issues when you try to make a tinyblob column part of a primary key, which is what hibernate needs to do with the Thing_letterFrequencies table. So I would rather have letter mapped to a varchar(255) the way startLetter is. Unfortunately, I've been fussing with the MapKey annotation for a while now and haven't been able to make this work. I've also tried @MapKeyManyToMany(targetEntity=Product.class) without success. Can anyone tell me what are the correct annotations for my letterCounts map so that hibernate will treat the letterCounts map key the same way it does startLetter?

    Read the article

  • Mysql - Help me alter this query to apply AND logic instead of OR in searching?

    - by sandeepan-nath
    First execute these tables and data dumps :- CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `Tags` ( `id_tag` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL auto_increment, `tag` varchar(255) default NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id_tag`), UNIQUE KEY `tag` (`tag`), KEY `id_tag` (`id_tag`), KEY `tag_2` (`tag`), KEY `tag_3` (`tag`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 AUTO_INCREMENT=18 ; INSERT INTO `Tags` (`id_tag`, `tag`) VALUES (1, 'key1'), (2, 'key2'); CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `Tutors_Tag_Relations` ( `id_tag` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL default '0', `id_tutor` int(10) default NULL, KEY `Tutors_Tag_Relations` (`id_tag`), KEY `id_tutor` (`id_tutor`), KEY `id_tag` (`id_tag`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1; INSERT INTO `Tutors_Tag_Relations` (`id_tag`, `id_tutor`) VALUES (1, 1), (2, 1); The following query finds all the tutors from Tutors_Tag_Relations table which have reference to at least one of the terms "key1" or "key2". SELECT td . * FROM Tutors_Tag_Relations AS td INNER JOIN Tags AS t ON t.id_tag = td.id_tag WHERE t.tag LIKE "%key1%" OR t.tag LIKE "%key2%" Group by td.id_tutor LIMIT 10 Please help me modify this query so that it returns all the tutors from Tutors_Tag_Relations table which have reference to both the terms "key1" and "key2" (AND logic instead of OR logic). Please suggest an optimized query considering huge number of data records (the query should NOT individually fetch two sets of tutors matching each keyword and then find the intersection).

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21  | Next Page >