Hi,

Today’s MySQL Weekly Seminar is third one, which theme was “MySQL Storage Engines”.  It seems that almost 80% of attendees are using InnoDB for their system.  However, there are actually more storage engines available for MySQL.  This time, Kajiyama; MySQL Technical Evangelist presented variable storage engines along with tips and examples for how to use them.

First, the seminar started with the introduction of popular MySQL storage engines such as MyISAM, InnoDB and Falcon.  He described architectures and features for each storage engine and what storage engine is appropriate for each application.

Then, it went deeper into storage engines details.  Each engine has specific features.  And third-party storage engines’ unique functions and next-generation transactional storage …

I should have written about it a while ago but I never had a change.
I'm speaking at Velocity conference taking place in the Bay Area 23-24 of June.

At the same conference we will have a book signing event for our book High Performance MySQL 2nd Edition which is finally in printing and should start shipping next week.

Entry posted by peter | No comment

Add to: …

MySQL 5.1.24-rc ships with a EXAMPLE storage engine which is basically a dummy storage engine and serves as a useful source to start writing your own custom storage engine.

However, it is not available for use, by default. You can verify this as follows:

mysql> show engines;

+------------+---------+-----------------------------------------------------------+--------------+----+------------+ | Engine     | Support | Comment                                                   | Transactions | XA | Savepoints | +------------+---------+-----------------------------------------------------------+--------------+----+------------+ | …

MySQL 5.1.24-rc ships with a EXAMPLE storage engine which is basically a dummy storage engine and serves as a useful source to start writing your own custom storage engine.

However, it is not available for use, by default. You can verify this as follows:

mysql> show engines;

+------------+---------+-----------------------------------------------------------+--------------+----+------------+ | Engine     | Support | Comment                                                   | Transactions | XA | Savepoints | +------------+---------+-----------------------------------------------------------+--------------+----+------------+ | …

I sometimes encounter the issue where a replication slave is behind the master, while happily connected and in state of "waiting for binlog event". Clearly it somehow didn't get the memo that new stuff was available. I know others have seen this too, but for lack of reproducibility it's not yet a bug report.
Mark Barger of ANYwebcam has been kind enough to tweak a script so Nagios can alert on this problem, see the Nagios Scripts page in the Resources/Tools section of the OQ website. See the page itself for further details on monitoring and dealing with the problem.

Tracking MySQL replication status in general is important anyway, as basically a master doesn't "care" whether a slave is connected or not (the system is slave driven) and a slave can quite validly not be connected or replicating at any point in time (stopped to take a backup …

Hearing from Brian that UDFs might be slower than native functions in MySQL, I did a small benchmark.

mysql> select benchmark(1e9,abs(1));
+-----------------------+
| benchmark(1e9,abs(1)) |
+-----------------------+
|                     0 | 
+-----------------------+
1 row in set (27.15 sec)

mysql> select benchmark(1e9,udf_abs(1));
+---------------------------+
| benchmark(1e9,udf_abs(1)) |
+---------------------------+
|                         0 | 
+---------------------------+
1 row in set (43.04 sec)

The numbers were taken on my MacBook (Core 2 Duo @ 2GHz, OS X 10.4.11) running the official binary version of MySQL 5.1.25-rc for 32-bit arch. So the overhead of UDFs compared to native functions seems to be about 30 clocks per each call.

So the question is whether it would matter on an actual application. I created a 100k row heap table and performed …

The Boston MySQL User Group was lucky enough to get Keith Murphy to speak at the June User Group meeting, about backups.

Direct play the video at:
http://technocation.org/node/559/play

Direct download the video (351 MB) at:
http://technocation.org/node/559/download

Links referred to in the presentation:

MyLVMBackup by Lenz Grimmer
http://lenz.homelinux.org/mylvmbackup/

InnoDB Hot Backup:
Prices are at:
http://www.innodb.com/hot-backup/order/
and at the time of this writing are:
1-Year License ? 390 USD$ 605 per server
…

The Boston MySQL User Group was lucky enough to get Keith Murphy to speak at the June User Group meeting, about backups.

Links referred to in the presentation:

MyLVMBackup by Lenz Grimmer
http://lenz.homelinux.org/mylvmbackup/

InnoDB Hot Backup:
Prices are at:
http://www.innodb.com/hot-backup/order/
and at the time of this writing are:
1-Year License ? 390 USD$ 605 per server
Perpetual License ? 990 USD$ 1540 per server

read more

I’ve had to accept the “practice what you preach” pill recently due to a disaster at my hosting provider. See Learning from a Disaster.

While it was my own personal site on a dedicated server in question and not a business generating review I found that my MySQL Backup Strategy was incomplete ( It is also based on code 4 years old). I found that I had not tested my Disaster Recovery Plan adequately. I have used my backup and recovery approach in the past for various controlled situations and testing successfully.

So what mistakes did I make. There were two.

1. I was using a cold backup approach. That is specifically copying the entire MySQL Database in a controlled manner at the file system level. These were also copied to an alternate shared hosting server for storage. This works fine when you backup server supports a …