[MDEV-5495] Server won't start when setting innodb_buffer_pool_size larger than a certain amount Created: 2014-01-01 Updated: 2014-01-31 Resolved: 2014-01-08 |
|
| Status: | Closed |
| Project: | MariaDB Server |
| Component/s: | None |
| Affects Version/s: | 10.0.8 |
| Fix Version/s: | None |
| Type: | Bug | Priority: | Major |
| Reporter: | Marc Isaacson | Assignee: | Unassigned |
| Resolution: | Not a Bug | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | None | ||
| Environment: |
Ubuntu 12.04 1GB RAM |
||
| Description |
|
If I tried to set innodb_buffer_pool_size even as large as 384M I was unable to start the mysqld. Unfortunately, I did not save the message from mariadb-error.log before I removed 10.0 and switched to 5.5. |
| Comments |
| Comment by Elena Stepanova [ 2014-01-08 ] | ||||||||
|
The value itself works fine in 10.0, it's not even big on the today's standards. innodb_buffer_pool_size=384M: MariaDB [test]> select @@innodb_buffer_pool_size;
---------------------------
--------------------------- MariaDB [test]> select @@version;
----------------------
---------------------- innodb_buffer_pool_size=1G: MariaDB [test]> select @@innodb_buffer_pool_size;
---------------------------
--------------------------- MariaDB [test]> select @@version;
----------------------
---------------------- Considering that your machine has 1Gb RAM, it is not surprising that you couldn't set the value. Some default values got increased comparing to 5.5, so the most likely reason was that you just did not have enough memory to run it this way. If innodb_buffer_pool_size is important for you, you need to reduce some other values. | ||||||||
| Comment by Marc Isaacson [ 2014-01-31 ] | ||||||||
|
Well, I can tell you that I have the value set to 512M right now under Maria 5.5. Also, according to the documentation, you should be able to set the value to as much as 80% of your total memory. So, I still think that there is some issue in Maria 10. | ||||||||
| Comment by Marc Isaacson [ 2014-01-31 ] | ||||||||
|
Ah, sorry. I overlooked the part of your response that said that other default values were increased. Maybe that is the real issue. It could be the combination of the various values. | ||||||||
| Comment by Elena Stepanova [ 2014-01-31 ] | ||||||||
|
That's right, the combination of values. You can run SHOW VARIABLES, see buffer sizes, and sum them up to get a rough estimation. Regarding documentation suggesting 80%, I guess technically it could be made more accurate, but it would have to go into too much detail. It just does not take into account low-memory configurations. |