- discuss - lists.mariadb.org

Re: [Maria-discuss] mariadb-backup meta deb package
by Federico Razzoli 14 Feb '18

14 Feb '18

I am not sure this is a good idea. Having a meta-package for the server and not one for mariabackup may seem inconsistent, but users are different. A lot of people just want MariaDB and don't (need to) care about versions. Maybe they barely know SQL and just want to run a simple script. For backups, it's different. If you need mariabackup you manage a MariaDB instance, and you need to care about versions. Federico Da: Florent B <florent(a)coppint.com> A: Vladislav Vaintroub <vvaintroub(a)gmail.com>; "maria-discuss(a)lists.launchpad.net" <maria-discuss(a)lists.launchpad.net> Inviato: Mercoledì 14 Febbraio 2018 12:23 Oggetto: Re: [Maria-discuss] mariadb-backup meta deb package I'm sorry but that's what not I mean. My message was just a suggestion, to have a "meta-package" for Debian repository, like we have a meta-package "mariadb-server" that points to "mariadb-server-10.2" (for example, if you installed 10.2 repository). In my deployment script, I just install "mariadb-server", without specifying version. I would like to do the same for "mariadb-backup". For now, I have to specify version of package : mariadb-backup-10.2. It could be nice to have a "mariadb-backup" meta-package to point automatically to the latest version available. On 14/02/2018 12:08, Vladislav Vaintroub wrote: #yiv8725764717 #yiv8725764717 -- _filtered #yiv8725764717 {panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;} _filtered #yiv8725764717 {font-family:Calibri;panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}#yiv8725764717 #yiv8725764717 p.yiv8725764717MsoNormal, #yiv8725764717 li.yiv8725764717MsoNormal, #yiv8725764717 div.yiv8725764717MsoNormal {margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:11.0pt;}#yiv8725764717 a:link, #yiv8725764717 span.yiv8725764717MsoHyperlink {color:blue;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv8725764717 a:visited, #yiv8725764717 span.yiv8725764717MsoHyperlinkFollowed {color:#954F72;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv8725764717 .yiv8725764717MsoChpDefault {} _filtered #yiv8725764717 {margin:70.85pt 70.85pt 56.7pt 70.85pt;}#yiv8725764717 div.yiv8725764717WordSection1 {}#yiv8725764717 The latest backup will not work with your 10.1 server. Mariabackup version should match server version that you have on the same box. mariabackup from 10.1 appears to work with 5.5 and 10.0, but this is merely by luck and by accident. From: Florent B Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2018 11:58 AM To: maria-discuss(a)lists.launchpad.net Subject: Re: [Maria-discuss] mariadb-backup meta deb package On 14/02/2018 11:16, Reindl Harald wrote: > > > Am 14.02.2018 um 10:51 schrieb Florent B: >> Wouldn't be nice to have a metapackage mariadb-backup in Debian >> repository, that depends on the current best version >> (mariadb-backup-10.2, etc..) ? >> >> Like "mariadb-server" package in fact > > you missed to describe the problem you want to solve by step in with a > solution which is always the wrong start because in case you didn't > understand the real problem any solution is wrong I just want to install the latest mariadb-backup package, without checking version by myself (10.1, 10.2...). Exactly the same as the "mariadb-server" metapackage for Debian, which points to latest version possible. _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~maria-discuss Post to : maria-discuss(a)lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~maria-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~maria-discuss Post to : maria-discuss(a)lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~maria-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

1 0

Re: [Maria-discuss] mariadb-backup meta deb package
by Reindl Harald 14 Feb '18

14 Feb '18

Am 14.02.2018 um 11:58 schrieb Florent B: > On 14/02/2018 11:16, Reindl Harald wrote: >> >> Am 14.02.2018 um 10:51 schrieb Florent B: >>> Wouldn't be nice to have a metapackage mariadb-backup in Debian >>> repository, that depends on the current best version >>> (mariadb-backup-10.2, etc..) ? >>> >>> Like "mariadb-server" package in fact >> >> you missed to describe the problem you want to solve by step in with a >> solution which is always the wrong start because in case you didn't >> understand the real problem any solution is wrong > > I just want to install the latest mariadb-backup package, without > checking version by myself (10.1, 10.2...). > Exactly the same as the "mariadb-server" metapackage for Debian, which > points to latest version possible besides that "mariadb-server" for sure is not a metapackage i doubt and hope for debian users that you don't get *major upgrade* and 10.1 to 10.2 *is* a major upgrade nobody upgrades just by the way you heavily confuse point updates and major upgrades 10.1 versus 10.2 is practically the same as 10 versus 11 just with different numbers but must not be confused with 10.1.10 to 10.1.11 and when you are at it learn what a meta-package is because in communication it's important to know what you are talking about https://askubuntu.com/questions/66257/what-is-the-difference-between-a-meta…

1 0

Re: [Maria-discuss] mariadb-backup meta deb package
by Vladislav Vaintroub 14 Feb '18

14 Feb '18

The latest backup will not work with your 10.1 server. Mariabackup version should match server version that you have on the same box. mariabackup from 10.1 appears to work with 5.5 and 10.0, but this is merely by luck and by accident. From: Florent B Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2018 11:58 AM To: maria-discuss(a)lists.launchpad.net Subject: Re: [Maria-discuss] mariadb-backup meta deb package On 14/02/2018 11:16, Reindl Harald wrote: > > > Am 14.02.2018 um 10:51 schrieb Florent B: >> Wouldn't be nice to have a metapackage mariadb-backup in Debian >> repository, that depends on the current best version >> (mariadb-backup-10.2, etc..) ? >> >> Like "mariadb-server" package in fact > > you missed to describe the problem you want to solve by step in with a > solution which is always the wrong start because in case you didn't > understand the real problem any solution is wrong I just want to install the latest mariadb-backup package, without checking version by myself (10.1, 10.2...). Exactly the same as the "mariadb-server" metapackage for Debian, which points to latest version possible. _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~maria-discuss Post to : maria-discuss(a)lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~maria-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

1 0

[Maria-discuss] [GSoC Idea Discussion] "mcsapi needs a new read API" project
by Udit Juneja 14 Feb '18

14 Feb '18

Hi, I am Udit Juneja, a Compter Science undergraduate student at Thapar Institute of Engineering and Technology, India. I am interested in contributing to MariaDB. A brief introduction about me: I am familiar with programming languages (C, C++, Python, PyCUDA, MySQL). I have won many hackathons. I am interested in "mcsapi needs a new read API" project. I have already started exploring MariaDB, and the APIs which are currently published on the website. I would like to discuss the idea further and maybe submit a proposal in GSoC later. Regards, Udit Juneja

3 2

[Maria-discuss] Google Summer of Code 2018 - MariaDB Foundation accepted
by Colin Charles 14 Feb '18

14 Feb '18

Hi, I just noticed this piece of good news — MariaDB Foundation is accepted to participate in the Google Summer of Code 2018 again — https://summerofcode.withgoogle.com/ There is an already healthy list of ideas: https://mariadb.com/kb/en/library/google-summer-of-code-2018/ Many already have mentors from MariaDB Corporation or MariaDB Foundation. Some are looking for mentors. Happy coding this summer! cheers, -colin -- Colin Charles, http://bytebot.net/blog/ twitter: @bytebot | skype: colincharles "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." -- Mohandas Gandhi

1 0

Re: [Maria-discuss] System versioned tables inquiry
by serg＠mariadb.org 12 Feb '18

12 Feb '18

Hi, Benjamin! First: please send questions like this to maria-discuss(a)lists.launchpad.net it's a public mailing list dedicated to MariaDB. I am subscribed, so I'll see you mail there, and you may be sure I will, because it won't be accidentally catched by my spam filter, or sorted out in some obscure folder. Furthermore other subscribers will see your question and could reply if I will be not available (e.g. I could be travelling). Thank you. On Feb 05, bartels.benjamin(a)tutanota.de wrote: > Hello Mr. Golubchik, > I have a couple of questions on MariaDB's implementation of the system > versioned tables if you are not busy. > 1. Is there any mechanism in the current implementation to insert rows > with custom values for ROW START and ROW END? I know that since they > are automatically implemented as auto generated columns that they are > not allowed to be modified. But I feel like this would make backup > migration very hard, since you cannot insert into these generated > columns. Maybe I am missing something but from what I can tell it is > not possible at the moment.MSSQL from my understanding doesn't > restrict the ROW START and ROW END columns to generated columns so it > is possible to insert some data into those columns and then alter the > table to make it system versioned.See (Listing > 1): http://www.itprotoday.com/microsoft-sql-server/first-look-system-versioned-… No, there is none. It is intentional, to protect the integrity of the history. SQL Standard, as far as I know, does not provide any way of falsifying the history of system versioned tables. There is another feature in the standard: application-time period tables, in there one can provide arbitrary values for start and end timestamps. But MariaDB 10.3 doesn't support application-time period tables. As for backups, yes, I agree, it's a problem. Binary backups will preserve the history just fine, but mysqldump backups will not, they'll reset the history. > 2. What is supposed to be done in 2038 when NOW() will surpass the ROW > END column? Will there be a way to have a bigger underlying datatype > to represent the historic columns? That's the common issue for any TIMESTAMP columns. We don't have any solution specific to system versioned tables. I could *guess* that closer to that date TIMESTAMP width will be increased and, perhaps, there will be some migration procedure in mysql_uprade. There are no specific plans yet. Regards, Sergei Chief Architect MariaDB and security(a)mariadb.org

1 0

[Maria-discuss] [MARIADB 5.5] Profiling truncated
by Fabien CLERC 12 Feb '18

12 Feb '18

Hello, I'm trying to profile a very long query in production (MariaDB 5.5) using "set session profiling = 1" but when I run the command "show profile for query 1", there is only the only 100 last steps of the query. It's the same checking in "INFORMATION_SCHEMA.PROFILING" I understand the parameter "profiling_history_size" is the maximum number of queries and not the maximum steps stored fora query. => How can I change the number of steps available in the result of the profiling ? Thanks and Regards *Fabien CLERC* <https://www.facebook.com/Yieloo-184624595039051/?fref=ts> <https://twitter.com/intraknow> <https://plus.google.com/+Intraknow?hl=fr> fabien.clerc(a)yieloo.com ____________________________________________________________ *Editeur de la solution intra'know* Espace performance 3 - Bâtiment Z - 35769 Saint-Grégoire www.intraknow.com <https://www.intra-know.com/yieloo/admin/cciaux/modif/www.intraknow.com> 02 99 55 15 03

2 1

[Maria-discuss] Clarification about have_ssl and have_openssl variables
by Peter Laursen 11 Feb '18

11 Feb '18

MySQL documentation states https://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.7/en/server-system-variables.html#sysvar… simply states "This variable is an alias for have_ssl.". I checked with a few Oracle/MySQL installations that the two variables have identical values. But this is not the case on MariaDB (I checked my local Windows installs of 10.1 and 10.2). have_openssl is NO - have_ssl is YES|DISABLED. We believe that this is the reason for a newly reported problem to us: SSL-connections is not possibe to MariaDB on Amazon RDS. We verified the problem with a fresh RDS instance with MariaDB 10.2 and running with SSL enabled. The 3 different 'mysql' CLI's give results: *MariaDB 10.2.6 version:* - without ssl, gives 'Access denied error' - with ssl, it gives Error No. 2026: SSl Connection error: Certificate signature check failed *using MySQL 5.7.x version:* it connects to the server irrespective of the ssl parameter passed or not (but we don't know if SSL is actually used. It may silently connect without SSL if SSL is not possible) *MariaDB 10.1.22 version:* without ssl: it gives 'Access denied error' with ssl (Works as expected) Any thoughts on this? What can we do? We are affected as we use MariaDB Connector/C 2.33 currently -- Peter -- Webyog

2 1

[Maria-discuss] MariaDB server 10.1.31 a little question ?
by Ljr Yang 08 Feb '18

08 Feb '18

Hi, There two little qustion in MariaDB 10.1.31, please confirm, thanks. 1) After install MariaDB 10.1.31 , in error log show xtradb version 5.6.36-83.0 ? it should 5.6.38-83.0 2018-02-07 19:07:47 140196300970016 [Note] InnoDB: Percona XtraDB ( http://www.percona.com) 5.6.36-83.0 started; log seque nce number 6162730 2) in the web page , show " Download MariaDB Server 10.2.10" , it should "10.0.34 Galera cluster", https://mariadb.com/resources/blog/mariadb-server-10131-and-mariadb-galera-…

2 1

[Maria-discuss] MariaDB threads optimalization
by Brano Gege 07 Feb '18

07 Feb '18

Hi All, I got problem with mariadb performance, NEW (pcie) server: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2637 v4 @ 3.50GHz, 1TB NVMe disks, 128 GB RAM, installed Debian 4.9.65-3+deb9u1, Ver 15.1 Distrib 10.1.26-MariaDB OLD server: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-1630 v3 @ 3.70GHz, SSD disk, 64 GB RAM, FreeBSD 11.0-STABLE, 10.1.21-MariaDB On servers is running just mysql, I copy my.ini file, config files are same. mysql slap results for example employees db: #less /root/slap/select_query.sql SELECT emp_no, first_name, last_name, gender FROM employees LIMIT 10; SELECT emp_no, first_name, last_name, gender FROM employees ORDER BY last_name ASC LIMIT 10; SELECT COUNT(emp_no) FROM employees WHERE last_name = 'Aamodt'; SELECT last_name, COUNT(emp_no) AS num_emp FROM employees GROUP BY last_name ORDER BY num_emp DESC LIMIT 10; SELECT employees.* FROM employees LEFT JOIN dept_emp ON ( dept_emp.emp_no = employees.emp_no ) LEFT JOIN salaries ON ( salaries.emp_no = salaries.emp_no ) WHERE employees.first_name LIKE '%Jo%' AND salaries.from_date > '1993-01-21' AND salaries.to_date < '1998-01-01' LIMIT 0, 100; root@pcie:~/slap# mysqlslap --pre-query="RESET QUERY CACHE;" --create-schema=employees --query="/root/slap/select_query.sql" --iterations=10 --concurrency=1 Average number of seconds to run all queries: 0.459 seconds DB1: Average number of seconds to run all queries: 0.627 seconds root@pcie:~/slap# mysqlslap --pre-query="RESET QUERY CACHE;" --create-schema=employees --query="/root/slap/select_query.sql" --iterations=10 --concurrency=2 Benchmark Average number of seconds to run all queries: 0.473 seconds DB1: Average number of seconds to run all queries: 0.626 seconds root@pcie:~/slap# mysqlslap --pre-query="RESET QUERY CACHE;" --create-schema=employees --query="/root/slap/select_query.sql" --iterations=10 --concurrency=4 Average number of seconds to run all queries: 0.486 seconds DB1: Average number of seconds to run all queries: 0.656 seconds root@pcie:~/slap# mysqlslap --pre-query="RESET QUERY CACHE;" --create-schema=employees --query="/root/slap/select_query.sql" --iterations=10 --concurrency=8 Average number of seconds to run all queries: 0.569 seconds DB1: Average number of seconds to run all queries: 1.136 seconds root@pcie:~/slap# mysqlslap --pre-query="RESET QUERY CACHE;" --create-schema=employees --query="/root/slap/select_query.sql" --iterations=10 --concurrency=16 Benchmark Average number of seconds to run all queries: 0.948 seconds DB1: Average number of seconds to run all queries: 1.750 seconds root@pcie:~/slap# mysqlslap --pre-query="RESET QUERY CACHE;" --create-schema=employees --query="/root/slap/select_query.sql" --iterations=10 --concurrency=32 Average number of seconds to run all queries: 1.650 seconds DB1: Average number of seconds to run all queries: 2.455 seconds root@pcie:~/slap# mysqlslap --pre-query="RESET QUERY CACHE;" --create-schema=employees --query="/root/slap/select_query.sql" --iterations=10 --concurrency=64 Average number of seconds to run all queries: 3.306 seconds DB1: Average number of seconds to run all queries: 3.176 seconds root@pcie:~/slap# mysqlslap --pre-query="RESET QUERY CACHE;" --create-schema=employees --query="/root/slap/select_query.sql" --iterations=10 --concurrency=128 Average number of seconds to run all queries: 6.744 seconds DB1: Average number of seconds to run all queries: 5.737 seconds root@pcie:~/slap# mysqlslap --pre-query="RESET QUERY CACHE;" --create-schema=employees --query="/root/slap/select_query.sql" --iterations=10 --concurrency=256 Average number of seconds to run all queries: 13.474 seconds (verified 2nd run: 12.883 seconds) DB1: Average number of seconds to run all queries: 3.451 seconds (verified 2nd run: 4.935 seconds) root@pcie:~/slap# mysqlslap --pre-query="RESET QUERY CACHE;" --create-schema=employees --query="/root/slap/select_query.sql" --iterations=10 --concurrency=512 Average number of seconds to run all queries: 26.085 seconds (verified 2nd run: 26.307 seconds) DB1: Average number of seconds to run all queries: 15.862 seconds (verified 2nd run: 11.280 seconds) as you can see with raising threads PCIE performance is lowering rapidly. Any idea what to check? Thank you. I post this question couple of days with more information also here: https://serverfault.com/questions/895506/mariadb-threads-optimalization

4 7