Bug 173253
Summary: | New Storage engine not build in | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Remi COLLET <admin> |
Component: | mysql | Assignee: | Tom Lane <tgl> |
Status: | CLOSED RAWHIDE | QA Contact: | David Lawrence <dkl> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | byte, dash, fedora, hhorak, joe, liste, poelstra, somlo |
Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | FutureFeature, Reopened |
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
URL: | http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/storage-engines.html | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Enhancement | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2009-02-16 14:41:07 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
Remi COLLET
2005-11-15 18:02:52 UTC
What are these actually useful for ... and if they are so useful, why didn't MySQL AB choose to build them by default? I'm not really inclined to bloat our distribution by compiling stuff that the upstream developers don't think is needed. MySQL AB distribute 2 versions of the server. 1. MySQL-server (standard) which only include the archive storage engine 2. MySQL-Max which include all the storage engines (archive, csv, backhole et federated) I think this new features worth to be tested by the usere. How can they test it, if they are not included in the distro ? We (Fedora) only provides MySQL-server, which is the standard release. The MySQL-Max release is labelled experimental, and has all the storage engines like csv/federated/blackhole. For more information about the engines, read http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/storage-engines.html So, should we enable all these by default in our mysql-server? I doubt it. This may make for an excellent Extras package however. *** Bug 388731 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** Given comment #3 and the fact that extras is no more should this RFE remain open? I'm still of the opinion that these extra storage engines are not useful enough to be part of the core Fedora distribution. The tiny number of requests for 'em seems adequate evidence for that position. Upstream is working on a "pluggable" storage engine architecture, which I believe will make it feasible to distribute add-on storage engines as separately-built SRPMs. My inclination is to hold on till that materializes, and then encourage whoever is sufficiently interested to maintain such a separate SRPM. Re: comment #6: They're not built in because nobody uses them. Nobody uses them because they're not built in. Chicken, meet egg... :) I stand by my original position that it makes sense not to build the extra engines in a conservative distribution such as RHEL. However, Fedora being positioned as a "cutting edge" distro, meant to enable its users to try the latest and greatest, it would make sense to include them there. Hi, I've made some tests on pluggable storage engine. I think it will be really simpler to have a simple SRPM with optional storage engine as sub-packages (than a separate SRPM using the same source / patches) But, the main issue I think is that this options must be enabled by a SQL command (INSTALL PLUGIN ...), which doesn't seem possible in %post, %postun scriptlet. Regards Apparently the upstream provider agrees with Tom that they should have been built by default. From the mysql bugtracker: Bug #28844 CSV Engine not available in Enterprise Builds [9 Jun 2007 19:46] Paul DuBois Noted in 5.0.44 changelog. Enterprise builds did not include the CSV storage engine. CSV is now included in Enterprise builds for all platforms except Windows, QNX, and NetWare. mysql 5.1 appears to build all of these by default (some are statically linked and others are plugins). So this is done, at least as far as rawhide is concerned. Hi apologies for opening this. Please feel free to close if I am mistaken. It seems to me like rawhide still does not have this compiled in as per upstream. Did you mean that this was in rawhide with the compile option "--with-archive-storage-engine"? or is it included some other way? Rawhide version i tested with: [root@fedora ~]# rpm -q mysql-server mysql-server-5.1.31-1.fc11.x86_64 mysql> show engines; +------------+---------+------------------------------------------------------------+--------------+------+------------+ | Engine | Support | Comment | Transactions | XA | Savepoints | +------------+---------+------------------------------------------------------------+--------------+------+------------+ | ndbcluster | NO | Clustered, fault-tolerant tables | NULL | NULL | NULL | | MRG_MYISAM | YES | Collection of identical MyISAM tables | NO | NO | NO | | CSV | YES | CSV storage engine | NO | NO | NO | | MyISAM | DEFAULT | Default engine as of MySQL 3.23 with great performance | NO | NO | NO | | InnoDB | YES | Supports transactions, row-level locking, and foreign keys | YES | YES | YES | | MEMORY | YES | Hash based, stored in memory, useful for temporary tables | NO | NO | NO | +------------+---------+------------------------------------------------------------+--------------+------+------------+ 6 rows in set (0.00 sec) It's a plugin --- you need to do "INSTALL PLUGIN" or whatever the command is. Ah ok yes thanks that seems to work ok: mysql> install plugin archive soname 'ha_archive.so'; Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.10 sec) "show engines;" and "create table test engine archive;" seems to produce the required ARZ database |