Re: Etch and MySQL 5.1 (64-bit)
hi,
maybe i missunderstand your question - or vice versa?! ;)
i don't want to use swap, because reading from RAM is about 10000 x
faster than reading from disk.
>> hi & thx,
>> PAE is not the best solution (as i read). and bigmem is not the solution
>> for MySQL. i read a good article - but in german :(
>>
>> -> with 32-bit a single process just can address 3 GB RAM (by the way:
>> windows only 2 GB).
>>
>> if you want to address more than 3 GB memory in a single process, you
>> have to use the 64-bit code.
>>
>>
> Why do you need so much memory for a single process ? Why your process
> doesn't use swap memory, instead of real memory ?
>
>> thx & cu
>>
>> jens
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 2:15 PM, W4/Webmaster <webmaster@w-4.de> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> hi,
>>>> has anyone running a productive box running with debian etch
>>>> and mysql 5.1.X? both 63-bit (!).
>>>>
>>>> the reason is: the complete database should stay in memory / RAM. the
>>>> 32-bit can address max. 3 GB RAM, but DB has >4 GB at the moment.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> What about with PAE extensions on the kernel.. or the -bigmem kernel?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> any experiences with that? any hints for installation? i just can find
>>>> mysql 5.1 in "experimental". far away from stable ;)
>>>>
>>>> thanks for any hint / idea / solution!
>>>>
>>>> jens
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
>>>> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
>>>> listmaster@lists.debian.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
--
W4/Webmaster
webmaster@w-4.de
http://www.w-4.de
Reply to: