don't forget to change the MyISAM in your LocalSettings to InnoDB, and if
it says TYPE= change it to ENGINE=
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 10:50 AM, Eric K <ek79501(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
Ok I got this resolved. I found out I can change the
database type in
myPHPadmin and it was executing the same shell command (ALTER table).
If the leaders of Mediawiki are recommending InnoDB and thats the type of
DB that it now defaults to for a new installation, I should convert it to
InnoDB and trust that its a good decision and wont cause any problems later.
So I was able to change the database type in MyPHPAdmin. I did it for each
table. The options are available in MyPHPadmin:
Select the table you want to change -> "Operations" -> Change type to
InnoDB
I'm also changing the "collation" from "utf8_unicode_ci" to
"binary", for
a few tables.
What I did was install the latest MW in a test database and see what
options it was using for all the tables and then change the old tables to
match the options in the test database. I saw there are two tables that
have their own set up in the new version too (hit counter, and search
index) so I left them alone.
________________________________
From: Eric K <ek79501(a)yahoo.com>
To: MediaWiki announcements and site admin list <
mediawiki-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Saturday, December 3, 2011 11:18 PM
Subject: Re: [Mediawiki-l] Mysql ISAM vs InnoDB
When I installed my wiki for the first time a couple of years ago, MyISAM
was chosen as the default option so I went with that. I was looking up the
history of this list for comments on InnoDB vs MyISAM. I've seen people,
including Brion (below), recommending InnoDB. Rob Church also had the same
opinion:
http://wikimedia.7.n6.nabble.com/MYISAM-or-InnoDB-best-for-Mediawiki-td6917…
However for example on the following article, some disadvantages of InnoDB
are talked about:
http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2009/01/12/should-you-move-from-myisam-…
So it seems like both of them have advantages and disadvantages and so I'm
really confused about what to do - whether to stay where I am, or convert
to InnoDB. So my first questions are:
- I keep regular backups and haven't had DB problems in the past. Should I
really move to InnoDB? If I had to convert the DB, I can always do it in
the future without any problems, correct?
- Will I have any problems later if I stay on MyISAM?
I have MW 1.16.15 and am going to upgrade to 1.18.0. I have Shell access.
Now the DB has mixed tables (Semantic MW did its setup using InnoDB). Its
about 1GB in size. The wiki isnt too big, but say the DB size could go to a
few GBs in a few years.
Suppose I decided to move to InnoDB. My next questions were:
- Whats the procedure for this conversion? I will be working on a copy of
the database.
- I'm assuming there will be no long term issues about website speed and
reliability or anything else.
thanks
Eric
________________________________
From: Brion Vibber <brion(a)pobox.com>
To: MediaWiki announcements and site admin list <mediawiki-l(a)Wikimedia.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 5, 2006 8:48 PM
Subject: Re: [Mediawiki-l] Mysql ISAM vs InnoDB
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Jim Hu wrote:
> $wgDBtransactions gets set to true if using InnoDB tables. Is there
> an advantage to using InnoDB tables?
> The disadvantage is that with MySQL there is a file, ibdata1, that
> seems to grow endlessly if InnoDB tables are used. See
>
http://bugs.mysql.com/bug.php?id=1341
> We're wondering if we should just
convert everything to MyISAM. Any
> thoughts?
MyISAM tables are subject to a much higher likelihood of data
corruption, and cannot be read consistently (eg for backups) without
locking the database.
You may notice that the majority of complaints about corrupt tables
involving MediaWiki are about the 'searchindex' table, which is created
as MyISAM due to the requirements of the fulltext index.
In most wiki situations your database will indeed only grow, so the
table space not reclaiming disk space on deletions is usually not a
problem. In the wiki, all editing history is retained, and the space
from the rare small records that are actually removed will simply be
taken up by further edits.
If you for some reason want to import a lot of data, then delete it all,
then never work with any database data ever again, well... that's pretty
weird. ;) But as suggested in your link you can use per-table InnoDB
spaces in recent versions of MySQL, or you can use the more fragile
MyISAM tables, or you can "defragment" the table space by dumping it
out, deleting the space, and reimporting it.
In some situations MyISAM tables may also be faster, which could be
useful for certain kinds of statistical or other use.
- -- brion vibber (brion @
pobox.com)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -
http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFFdi+SwRnhpk1wk44RAp9sAKCVsoRRbxcgZ3D6VGWHSYKIdL4GjwCeKwr1
Br4tC50Y57MGjTnMhmak5Tg=
=Psfe
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
MediaWiki-l mailing list
MediaWiki-l(a)Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
_______________________________________________
MediaWiki-l mailing list
MediaWiki-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
_______________________________________________
MediaWiki-l mailing list
MediaWiki-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l