[Maria-discuss] InnoDB fake changes
Hi all
I see that 10.2 still has the innodb_fake_changes variable (OFF by default). That feature was stable in Percona Server 5.5, is beta in 5.6, and was removed in 5.7. Is it still there just for compatibility with old configuration files, or is there still a reason to use it? And in that case, is it stable or not?
Regards, Federico
Hi,
Yes, I have not yet made decision should the parameter be removed or left as it is. It is to my knowledge stable but use cases are limited.
R: Jan
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 11:54 AM, Federico Razzoli federico_raz@yahoo.it wrote:
Hi all
I see that 10.2 still has the innodb_fake_changes variable (OFF by default). That feature was stable in Percona Server 5.5, is beta in 5.6, and was removed in 5.7. Is it still there just for compatibility with old configuration files, or is there still a reason to use it? And in that case, is it stable or not?
Regards, Federico
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~maria-discuss Post to : maria-discuss@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~maria-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
On 21 Apr 2016, at 00:47, Jan Lindström jan.lindstrom@mariadb.com wrote:
Hi,
Yes, I have not yet made decision should the parameter be removed or left as it is. It is to my knowledge stable but use cases are limited.
From what I can see, its pretty clear that Percona Server now says: "Support for Fake Changes - Instead of slave prefetching using the fake changes, a 5.7 intra-schema parallel replication slave should be used.”
source: https://www.percona.com/doc/percona-server/5.7/changed_in_57.html
So is it not just wise to follow upstream XtraDB as opposed to keeping around what effectively is a dead feature / dead code?
R: Jan
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 11:54 AM, Federico Razzoli federico_raz@yahoo.it wrote: Hi all
I see that 10.2 still has the innodb_fake_changes variable (OFF by default). That feature was stable in Percona Server 5.5, is beta in 5.6, and was removed in 5.7. Is it still there just for compatibility with old configuration files, or is there still a reason to use it? And in that case, is it stable or not?
Regards, Federico
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~maria-discuss Post to : maria-discuss@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@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~maria-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
-- 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
Such an awesome feature. Sadly, it has been replaced and parallel replication is good enough.
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 10:06 AM, Colin Charles byte@aeon.com.my wrote:
On 21 Apr 2016, at 00:47, Jan Lindström jan.lindstrom@mariadb.com
wrote:
Hi,
Yes, I have not yet made decision should the parameter be removed or
left as it is. It is to my knowledge stable but use cases are limited.
From what I can see, its pretty clear that Percona Server now says: "Support for Fake Changes - Instead of slave prefetching using the fake changes, a 5.7 intra-schema parallel replication slave should be used.”
source: https://www.percona.com/doc/percona-server/5.7/changed_in_57.html
So is it not just wise to follow upstream XtraDB as opposed to keeping around what effectively is a dead feature / dead code?
R: Jan
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 11:54 AM, Federico Razzoli <
federico_raz@yahoo.it> wrote:
Hi all
I see that 10.2 still has the innodb_fake_changes variable (OFF by
default). That feature was stable in Percona Server 5.5, is beta in 5.6, and was removed in 5.7.
Is it still there just for compatibility with old configuration files,
or is there still a reason to use it? And in that case, is it stable or not?
Regards, Federico
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~maria-discuss Post to : maria-discuss@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@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~maria-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
-- 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
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~maria-discuss Post to : maria-discuss@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~maria-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
participants (4)
-
Colin Charles -
Federico Razzoli -
Jan Lindström -
MARK CALLAGHAN