March 2017 - discuss - lists.mariadb.org

[Maria-discuss] Multiple Mariadb 10.1 instances on Centos 7
by Sales 09 Mar '17

09 Mar '17

I don’t see a mariadb@.service file on centos 7. I need to install multiple instances of mariadb 10.1 though and have them run from systemd (on the same server). The doc page https://mariadb.com/kb/en/mariadb/systemd/ <https://mariadb.com/kb/en/mariadb/systemd/> says that it’s installed on “some” systems. Apparently, some does not include Centos 7. So, is there a way to obtain a copy of the relevant file(s) needed to run multiple instances? Perhaps from another distribution? Seems like it’s a much better starting point than trying to create all that myself. Or, will it simply not work? What is the best way then to run multiple instances on Centos 7? Steve

2 3

[Maria-discuss] Maria db read/write configuration issues
by Chaitanya Cheekate 09 Mar '17

09 Mar '17

Hi We have configured maxscale in our environment using the links http://karlssonondatabases.blogspot.in/2014/02/maxscale-for-rest-of-us-part…, 2, 3 . We have two slaves and one master and the replication between them is working well. But after configuring read/write split the select queries are being executed in master itself, not routing to the slaves. Please find the attached documents of maxscale configuration, maxscale commands maxscale log and. Please help with maxscale read/write split. Attached documentsdetails 1. maxsconf.txt from the location /etc/maxscale.cnf 2. maxscale-commands.txt, coomands like maxadmin -pmariadb list servers, maxadmin -pmariadb list services, maxadmin -pmariadb show service "Splitter Service", 3. maxscale-log.txt from /var/log/maxscale Thanks Chaitu -- Thanks.

4 4

[Maria-discuss] slave_compressed_protocol = 1 has no effect
by Phil Sweeney 09 Mar '17

09 Mar '17

Hi there, I've been trying to make use of the compressed replication protocol between two existing MariaDB 10.1.21 boxes. Replication itself has been working fine for a while. I do: SET GLOBAL slave_compressed_protocol = 1; On both master and slave. Then stop/start slave. However, when I monitor the network usage, I see no reduction in network traffic. However, I tried compression via an ssh tunnel and saw a big reduction (ssh doing the compression, not MariaDB). So the traffic is definitely compressible. I tried setting the param via my.cnf and also restarting both master and slave to see if that would make a difference - no luck. Have confirmed the global variable shows 'ON' after the change, and was 'OFF' before. Is there potentially an issue with this working with the MariaDB supplied binary tarball (e.g. some compression lib dependency?) I see nothing in error.log to show an issue. Any other useful ways to debug this? Thanks! Phil

2 1

[Maria-discuss] MariaDB 10.0.30 now available
by Daniel Bartholomew 08 Mar '17

08 Mar '17

The MariaDB project is pleased to announce the immediate availability of MariaDB 10.0.30. This is a stable (GA) release. See the Release Notes and Changelog for details. - - Links - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - MariaDB 10.0.30 - Release Notes: https://mariadb.com/kb/en/mdb-10030-rn/ - Changelog: https://mariadb.com/kb/en/mdb-10030-cl/ - Downloads: https://downloads.mariadb.org/mariadb/10.0.30 About MariaDB 10.0: - https://mariadb.com/kb/en/what-is-mariadb-100/ APT and YUM Repository Configuration Generator: - https://downloads.mariadb.org/mariadb/repositories/ - - MariaDB Webinars - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - There are several upcoming MariaDB-focused webinars and many previously held ones available to watch on an on-demand basis at: - https://mariadb.com/news-events/webinars - - MariaDB Books - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - There is an ever-growing library of MariaDB books available to help you get the most out of MariaDB. See the MariaDB Books page for details and links: - https://mariadb.com/kb/en/mariadb/books/ - - User Feedback plugin - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - MariaDB includes a User Feedback plugin. This plugin is disabled by default. If enabled, it submits basic, completely anonymous MariaDB usage information. This information is used by the developers to track trends in MariaDB usage to better guide development efforts. If you would like to help make MariaDB better, please add "feedback=ON" to your my.cnf or my.ini file! See http://mariadb.com/kb/en/user-feedback-plugin for more information. - - Quality - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - The project always strives for quality, but in reality, nothing is perfect. Please take time to report any issues you encounter at: - http://mariadb.org/jira - - Support MariaDB - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - If you would like to contribute to the MariaDB Foundation, please see the "contributing" and "donations" pages. We also have merchandise available in a cafepress store. All proceeds go to support the MariaDB Foundation. - https://mariadb.com/kb/en/contributing - https://mariadb.org/donate/ We hope you enjoy MariaDB! -- MariaDB Website - http://mariadb.org Twitter - http://twitter.com/mariadbfdn - http://twitter.com/mariadb Google+ - http://google.com/+mariadb Facebook - http://fb.com/MariaDB.dbms Knowledge Base - http://mariadb.com/kb

4 5

[Maria-discuss] Change to innodb_large_prefix with respect to creating long indexes
by Marco Nicosia 07 Mar '17

07 Mar '17

Hi there, We noticed a change between MariaDB 10.1.18 and 10.1.20, but I haven't been able to find anything in the changelogs or JIRA that would help me understand what changed, and why. On 10.1.18, if I set `innodb_large_prefix=OFF` I can create indexes with lengths greater than 767 bytes and MariaDB only issues a warning. If I configure `innodb_large_prefix=ON` I get an error and the index fails to create. This seems like a bug? On 10.1.20, mysql fails to create the index regardless of how innodb_large_prefix is configured. We think that the result is that in 10.1.20, tables must be created or altered to use `ROW_FORMAT DYNAMIC` or `ROW_FORMAT COMPRESSED` if they are to contain an index with greater than 767 bytes in it. Is this the desired behavior? Was there a bug in 10.1.18 (and maybe previous)? I'm trying to understand the context better so that when devs ask us why index creation is failing, we give them the correct answer for why it used to work, and what they should be doing differently now that we're on 10.1.20. Thanks! -- Marco Nicosia Pivotal Software, Inc.

4 3

[Maria-discuss] Replication-manager + Maxscale
by Karthick Subramanian 02 Mar '17

02 Mar '17

Hi Experts, I have a 2 db server with one as master and another one as slave. Maxscale implemented with below monitor config: *[MySQL Monitor]* *type=monitor* *module=mysqlmon* *servers=master1,slave1* *monitor_interval=500* *script=/usr/bin/replication-manager --user root:password --rpluser replusr:password * *--hosts $INITIATOR,$NODELIST --failover=force --interactive=false* *events=master_down* When I shutdown master, failover is not automated. MRM (Replication Manager) is not promoting the slave to master automatically. In maxscale log, I noticed below: *2017-03-02 03:33:36 notice : Executed monitor script '/usr/bin/replication-manager --user root:password --rpluser replusr:password --hosts $INITIATOR,$NODELIST --failover=force --interactive=false' on event 'master_down'.* *2017-03-02 03:33:36 error : No Master can be determined.* Is this because I didn't have the quorum (no slave) since its one master and one slave set-up. Is there any workaround. Regards, Kart

3 4