List:General Discussion« Previous MessageNext Message »
From:Reindl Harald Date:May 16 2013 11:49am
Subject:Re: Innodb innodb_buffer_pool_size?
View as plain text  

Am 16.05.2013 13:31, schrieb Ilya Kazakevich:
>> hwo would a innodb_buffer_pool larger than the whole database make
>> anything better? the best value is as large as the expected dataset, more is
>> wasting system ressources
> 
> You also may need space for adaptive indexes, locks etc so it is recommended to have
> pool size about 110% of your data.

yes but that is far away from 4 GB as a reply to
"du -h /mysql/ibdata1 1.8G /mysql/ibdata1" which
never got shrinked even if your real data are only
half of it after deletions

60-70% of RAM is a naive not to say dumb reccomendation, especially in
times where a ordinary workstation has 16 GB memory and it will bring
you no benefit while it may lead in troubles if whatever process allocates
a huge amount of memory sooner or later and the system starts to swap
or OOM killer get in action and is killing your mysqld as first process


Attachment: [application/pgp-signature] OpenPGP digital signature signature.asc
Thread
Innodb innodb_buffer_pool_size?RafaƂ Radecki16 May
  • Re: Innodb innodb_buffer_pool_size?Reindl Harald16 May
  • Re: Innodb innodb_buffer_pool_size?Claudio Nanni16 May
RE: Innodb innodb_buffer_pool_size?Vikas Shukla16 May
  • Re: Innodb innodb_buffer_pool_size?Reindl Harald16 May
    • RE: Innodb innodb_buffer_pool_size?Ilya Kazakevich16 May
      • Re: Innodb innodb_buffer_pool_size?Reindl Harald16 May
RE: Innodb innodb_buffer_pool_size?Vikas Shukla16 May