List:General Discussion« Previous MessageNext Message »
From:Chris Nolan Date:May 14 2004 3:40am
Subject:Re: InnoDB filesystem
View as plain text  
Jeremy Zawodny wrote:

>On Thu, May 13, 2004 at 04:51:27PM -0700, Dathan Vance Pattishall wrote:
>  
>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: Tim Cutts [mailto:tjrc@stripped]
>>>Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2004 7:11 AM
>>>To: MySQL List
>>>Subject: Re: InnoDB filesystem
>>>
>>>
>>>On 13 May 2004, at 3:34 pm, Dan Nelson wrote:
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>>>Pros: performance and bypassing the filesystem cache.
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>MySQL can't use all that memory itself, so it makes sense to allow the
>>>OS to cache as much disk space as possible in the memory that MySQL
>>>can't use directly?
>>>      
>>>
>>It depends, if your datafile is less then 16 GB then the system cache can
>>help, but fill up the innodb_buffer_pool you'll get better performance.
>>Think of innodb as being its own virtual filesystem. If you have 16GB it's
>>probably a 64 bit OS, and mysql is available in 64 bit.
>>    
>>
>
>I think that the problem is that it's *not* a 64 bit OS.  It's just an
>Intel 32bit box with > 4GB of memory.  And sine MySQL doesn't do PAE,
>it'll never see that extra memory.
>  
>
Didn't InnoDB gain PAE support on some platforms a little while ago?

Best regards,

Chris

>Jeremy
>  
>

Thread
InnoDB filesystemJFL13 May
  • Re: InnoDB filesystemJeremy Zawodny13 May
    • Re: InnoDB filesystemJFL13 May
      • Re: InnoDB filesystemDan Nelson13 May
        • Re: InnoDB filesystemTim Cutts13 May
          • RE: InnoDB filesystemDathan Vance Pattishall14 May
            • Re: InnoDB filesystemJeremy Zawodny14 May
              • RE: InnoDB filesystemDathan Vance Pattishall14 May
                • Re: InnoDB filesystemTim Cutts14 May
              • Re: InnoDB filesystemChris Nolan14 May
                • Re: InnoDB filesystemJeremy Zawodny14 May