|
|||||||||||
|
Re: Mysql monitering and performance tool
From: Baron Schwartz <baron(at)xaprb.com>
Date: Mon Jul 30 2007 - 08:48:16 EDT
>> Mark Leith wrote: >>> Baron Schwartz wrote: >>>> I stand corrected. I don't know why I didn't think of this! >>>> >>>> So you guys had to go the route of parsing InnoDB status too, huh? >>>> Fun, isn't it! >>> >>> Indeed, it is a rather interesting thing to do ;) Made even better >>> when it is limited to 64K and truncated with large transactions! >> >> Or a big deadlock with tons of tuples. I have submitted a feature >> request to remove the list of locks held, but I don't know how high a >> priority it's given. It's useless for non-developers, though Heikki >> told me he uses it every day. I wouldn't think it'd be hard to define >> a compile-time option whether to include all the tuples locked, so >> Heikki and Marko could see it but spare the rest of us :) Of course >> seeing just the first part of that output, which shows what kind of >> lock was held on which index, is very useful for non-InnoDB-developers >> too. > > Have you filed a feature request on this? I would agree that the list of > locks is certainly not of use to the average DBA, so removing this by > default would be a good idea. Yes, it's here: http://bugs.mysql.com/bug.php?id=29126 I actually combined two bug requests in one, now that I think about it. Maybe this wasn't a good idea. Maybe "trim down deadlock info" and "add lock info to normal output" should have been separated. >> Yep. But there's always that legacy support you have to keep around! > > Exactly! ;) > > If 'you' have parsed the output in a sane manner, many tools should be > unaffected, however, we can not rely on that, and changing innodb status > could break a lot of scripts already made out there ;) This is why we > have to be very careful and considered in making these kinds of changes. > Of course, the burden is also on the InnoDB developers to do this. I don't see how this change could be made without breaking non-sane scripts, though. This might have to be an incompatible change for those scripts that rely on seeing the list of tuples. For my part, as far as I know innotop's parser should be able to handle it as-is, and shouldn't even care about the order in which the sections are placed in the output. But I'd have to make a test case to prove that. Regardless, support for Google's patches is on the 1.6 roadmap for innotop, so there'll be a chance for me to see -- but not right now, I'm too busy with other things! Baron -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=lists@pantek.comReceived on Mon Jul 30 08:49:22 2007 This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Aug 09 2007 - 19:29:38 EDT |
||||||||||
|
|||||||||||