- developers - lists.mariadb.org

[Maria-developers] PERFORMANCE_SCHEMA to be disabled in 10.0 (10.0.12)
by Colin Charles 12 Jun '14

12 Jun '14

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/browse/MDEV-6249 Looking from the webscalesql list, there are examples of performance degradation: https://groups.google.com/d/msg/webscalesql/B-4bPIb8mHI/eUNsl0lSfbMJ https://groups.google.com/d/msg/webscalesql/B-4bPIb8mHI/-YZMMCuPw3QJ quote: "Our perf testing agrees with your assessment (we see about a 5%-6% perf hit when it's included and on, and a 2%-3% hit when it's included but off)" Please discuss this, either here or on MDEV-6249 Thanks cheers, -colin -- Colin Charles, Chief Evangelist, SkySQL - The MariaDB Company blog: http://bytebot.net/blog/| t: +6-012-204-3201 | Skype: colincharles

6 10

[Maria-developers] Extendet FederatedX storage engine to support updating Sphinx RT indexes
by Markus Lidel 12 Jun '14

12 Jun '14

Hello, the Sphinx Search engine has RT indexes, which could be updated with a subset of SQL commands, refered to as SphinxQL: http://sphinxsearch.com/docs/2.1.1/sphinxql-reference.html Because the FederatedX storage engine uses some commands, which Sphinx does not know, here is a patch, wich extends the FederatedX storage engine to support this subset of commands. Now its possible to update Sphinx RT indexes directly from MariaDB. To create a connection to the RT index in the Sphinx default RT-index: index rt { type = rt path = @CONFDIR@/data/rt rt_field = title rt_field = content rt_attr_string = title rt_attr_string = content rt_attr_uint = gid } you just have to call: CREATE TABLE `rt` ( `id` BIGINT UNSIGNED NOT NULL, `title` TEXT, `content` TEXT, `gid` INT UNSIGNED ) ENGINE=FEDERATED CONNECTION='sphinxql://root@localhost:9306/rt'; It would be great, if the attached patch could be integrated into MariaDB. If you have any suggestions, please feel free to contact me. Best regards, Markus Lidel

4 8

Re: [Maria-developers] [GSoC] Accepted student ready to work : )
by Pablo Estrada 10 Jun '14

10 Jun '14

Hello all, I'm still interested on a call, (I would make sure to write down everything as part of an email to keep it clearly organized here), but as Elena suggested, I'll try to look at Sergei's bzr repo first, and all the documentation. In any case, I already have a decent idea of how the data is arranged. I can see how it is difficult to trace test results back to code changes directly, but it might be possible. I still haven't figured out how to recognize what code changes pertain to the same 'history', or 'line' (I think that you were not considering this in your experiments... and it might turn out to not be relevant at all, but I still want to consider it, to try to make a more complete model). So I have just two questions that should be easy to answer by email: 1. In your graphs, exactly, what do you mean by Precision? What about Recall? And cutoff? 2. I looked at your launchpad profile but I can't seem to find the repo with your tests (if you even pushed it to lp at all). Is it available? That's it for today : ) Until next time. Pablo On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 12:28 AM, Sergei Golubchik <serg(a)skysql.com> wrote: > On April 23, 2014 10:07:23 AM CEST, Pablo Estrada wrote: > > >If it's not too inconvenient, do you think we could set up a Google > >Hangout > >or a Skype call on Monday to go over a few questions quickly? > > > Definitely. This week I'm on vacations and without a laptop, back home on > Sunday. So, Monday is fine. But please if you have specific questions - ask > them now in emails. I'll prepare answers for Monday, but it'll take time to > remember everything. That is, if you will wait with questions till the > call, I might not be able to remember the answer on the spot. > Regards, > Sergei >

4 17

Re: [Maria-developers] Rev 4234: Fixed bug mdev-6071
by Sergei Golubchik 10 Jun '14

10 Jun '14

Hi, Igor! On Jun 09, Igor Babaev wrote: > revno: 4234 > revision-id: igor(a)askmonty.org-20140610050716-0x8xaquf3itvofjc > parent: bar(a)mariadb.org-20140606062952-x2jwt4mgrgr6tpw6 > committer: Igor Babaev <igor(a)askmonty.org> > branch nick: maria-10.0-bugs > timestamp: Mon 2014-06-09 22:07:16 -0700 > message: > Fixed bug mdev-6071. > The method JOIN_CACHE::init may fail (return 1) if some conditions on the > used join buffer is not satisfied. For example it fails if join_buffer_size > is greater than join_buffer_space_limit. The conditions should be checked > when running the EXPLAIN command for the query. That's why the method > JOIN_CACHE::init has to be called for EXPLAIN commands as well. It's an improvement over the old behavior - as EXPLAIN shows correctly whether BKA is used. But I think there's still not enough diagnostics. In the bug report Sergey wrote that " I think it's a big gotcha that @join_buffer_size must be lower than @@join_buffer_space_limit when optimizer_space_limit optimization is off. " So, I'd believe users will be very confused that in some cases BKA is suddenly turned off, when they expect it to be used. Of course, without this bugfix they would've not even noticed that, which is even worse. So, this bugfix is good. But it would be nice to have some kind of an explanation of why BKA is not used. At the very least in the manual. Better - here as a warning, like if (for_explain) push_warning("BKA was not used because ..."; goto fail; > === modified file 'sql/sql_select.cc' > --- a/sql/sql_select.cc 2014-06-05 22:07:27 +0000 > +++ b/sql/sql_select.cc 2014-06-10 05:07:16 +0000 > @@ -10541,7 +10541,7 @@ > if (cache_level == 1) > prev_cache= 0; > if ((tab->cache= new JOIN_CACHE_BNL(join, tab, prev_cache)) && > - ((options & SELECT_DESCRIBE) || !tab->cache->init())) > + !tab->cache->init(MY_TEST(options & SELECT_DESCRIBE))) MY_TEST here (and in other similar places) is redundant, you could've simply written !tab->cache->init(options & SELECT_DESCRIBE)) > { > tab->icp_other_tables_ok= FALSE; > return (2 - MY_TEST(!prev_cache)); and while it wasn't part of your bug fix, I cannot help but noticing that MY_TEST() is redundant here too. !prev_cache is boolean, it's always 0 or 1. Regards, Sergei

1 0

Re: [Maria-developers] Google Code for Encryption of MariaDB
by Elmar Eperiesi-Beck 09 Jun '14

09 Jun '14

Hi, 1. what about an NDA between us, to give me the chance to have a pre-view. I will make sure, that your architecture and development fits into our work. Everything we can think of in an early stage does not make lot of work, but… 2. like. 3. We will post our concept next week into the MariaDB Developers community. 4. … or 1. Regards Elmar Am 09.06.2014 um 11:14 schrieb Jonas Oreland : > Hi there, > > 1) repo: as I said in my mail, the code is currently not yet published, > but the guy doing this said that he expects it to be with in a couple of weeks or so. > before this, i don't think you can see it. > > once it's published, I think you can find it at https://code.google.com, > but I'll check and let you know. > > 2) This is my personal email address, so I prefer if we keep the conversation > @maria-developers where I'm subscribed with work email address, if this is ok > by you ? > > 3) concept paper: sure > > 4) we don't really have a concept paper, but the code is complete and being rolled out. > I can answer questions about it, but I think it's easiest once it has been published. > > /Jonas > > > > On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 11:02 AM, Elmar Eperiesi-Beck wrote: > Jonas, > is there a repository, where I can find the actual source code of your encryption implementation? > Or do we have to sign an NDA to exchange these kind of information? > > We can have a look at your code and merge it with our existing implementation. > Additionally I would like to send you our concept paper, to give you an overview of our ideas. > > Regards > Elmar >

1 0

[Maria-developers] [GSoC] Week 3!
by sriram patil 09 Jun '14

09 Jun '14

Hi all, Here is my post for the 3rd week into GSoC project. http://goo.gl/bhl5ZW Suggestions and review are welcome! Thanks, Sriram

1 0

[Maria-developers] MariaDB 5.5.38 Release Prep
by Daniel Bartholomew 07 Jun '14

07 Jun '14

All, I've begun prep work on the MariaDB 5.5.38 release. Draft release notes and changelog are here: - https://mariadb.com/kb/en/mariadb-5538-release-notes/ - https://mariadb.com/kb/en/mariadb-5538-changelog/ Current plan is to activate and announce the release on Mon, 9 jun 2014. Thanks. -- Daniel Bartholomew, MariaDB Release Manager MariaDB | http://mariadb.com

1 0

[Maria-developers] MDEV-5533 - Backport Threadpool improvements from Percona Server
by Sergey Vojtovich 04 Jun '14

04 Jun '14

Hi Sergei, Since MDEV-5533 is marked critical for 10.0.12 it is a good time to start this discussion. IIRC we agreed that our intention is to accept default value change for thread_pool_max_threads into 10.0 and accept priority queue throttling into 10.1. So default value for thread_pool_max_threads has bumped in percona server from 500 to 100 000. The reason is: deadlocks and uneven distribution of worker threads between thread groups in case of stalled connections. But the above is contradicting to suggestions in KB: https://mariadb.com/kb/en/threadpool-in-55/ ... so ideally, there should be a single active thread for each CPU on the machine. ... If your application constantly pegs at 500 threads, it might be a strong indicator for high contention in the application, and threadpool does not help much. ... One way to solve the problem would be to set thread_pool_max_threads to a very high value, but this might be less than ideal, and negatively affect performance. ... Said the above, do you still think it is a good idea to raise default value of thread_pool_max_threads? If so, what should KB article state wrt this variable? Thanks, Sergey

1 0

Re: [Maria-developers] MDEV-6213: Query cache is not invalidated on cascade delete when database name contains special symbols
by Sergei Golubchik 03 Jun '14

03 Jun '14

Hi, Sanja! Please add in your revision a test case for MySQL bug#13919851 http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~mysql/mysql-server/5.6/revision/4514 and make sure that your fix doesn't break it. On May 09, sanja(a)askmonty.org wrote: > revno: 4207 > revision-id: sanja(a)askmonty.org-20140509104240-ksrk10tef5dq157z > branch nick: work-maria-10.0-MDEV-6213 > timestamp: Fri 2014-05-09 13:42:40 +0300 > message: > MDEV-6213: Query cache is not invalidated on cascade delete when > database name contains special symbols. > > Innodb should de-escape db/table names when sending them to QC Regards, Sergei

1 0

[Maria-developers] Please review a patch fixing a few MDEV-6001 blockers
by Alexander Barkov 03 Jun '14

03 Jun '14

Hi Sergei, can you please review my patch fixing a few bugs that are blockers for MDEV-6001? - MDEV-4858 Wrong results for a huge unsigned value inserted into a TIME column - MDEV-6097 Inconsistent results for CAST(int,decimal,double AS DATETIME) - MDEV-6099 Bad results for DATE_ADD(.., INTERVAL 2000000000000000000.0 SECOND) - MDEV-6100 No warning on CAST(9000000 AS TIME) - MDEV-6101 Hybrid functions do not add CURRENT_DATE when converting TIME to DATETIME - MDEV-6102 Comparison between TIME and DATETIME does not use CURRENT_DATE Thanks.

2 10