List:General Discussion« Previous MessageNext Message »
From:Roland Roland Date:May 31 2012 9:32am
Subject:Re: Best practice to minimize DB server performance effect (large
query)
View as plain text  
i agree it wouldn't cause trouble, though it might lock mysql as there's 
a number of other databases running on the same  server.
so performance is an issue even if it's just a CPU/RAM peak.


On 5/31/12 11:23 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> Am 31.05.2012 09:13, schrieb Roland RoLaNd:
>> Dear all,I have a task to anonymize data in 82000
>> record (for the time being)i've tested my script against
>> about 30  of them, and it takes about 2.4 sec for each
>> query to be executed.
> provide table structure and query example
> sounds like a bad design without key
>
> how can 30 updates take 2.4 seconds?
>
>> i'm seeking help with the following:
>> - what's the best way to run such a script without affecting the DB server
> performance?
>>    Should i limit the script to implement N number of records at a time?
>>    and then sleep or is there a better way?
>> - What's the best practice of handling errors and warnings in such a situation?
>> - How can i prevent the runtime errors and mysql locks?
> wrong question
>
> [--] Data in InnoDB tables: 6G (Tables: 49)
> [--] Up for: 5d 11h 17m 15s (493M q [1K qps], 43K conn, TX: 38B, RX: 14B)
> [--] Reads / Writes: 89% / 11%
>
> as you can see 30 queries or even 88.000 queries must not
> make any trouble if you table-design is OK
>

Thread
Best practice to minimize DB server performance effect (large query)Roland RoLaNd31 May
  • Re: Best practice to minimize DB server performance effect (largequery)Reindl Harald31 May
    • Re: Best practice to minimize DB server performance effect (largequery)Roland Roland31 May
      • Re: Best practice to minimize DB server performance effect (largequery)Reindl Harald31 May