i'd like to use the mysql odbc driver for connecting to my mysql database via my own app.
the problem is that it seems very unstable - i keep getting errors like:
[MySQL][ODBC 5.1 Driver][mysqld-5.5.8]MySQL server has gone away
it seems to be something like a session timeout.
so here's my questions:
- what is causing those errors?
- is there a way to fix it for getting stable connections?
- is it recommended at all using it for coding windows software?
thanks
My guess is you're opening the connection once and leaving it open. At some point, the connection either times out, or some network hiccup is causing the connection to be invalid/closed. The best way to do database access is to open the connection when you need to do work, then close it. Or, alternatively, change your code to support re-connecting when you encounter an error.
Based on discussion in the comments below, I would suggest dumping the access database to a csv file, then using something like PHPMySql to import the data into MySQL.
You can use the BigDump tool to import large databases dumps into MySQL. (via this site)
There are commercial alternatives out there -
OpenLink Single-tier ODBC Driver for MySQL
Related
I did a fresh install of Maxscale, and I was trying to set up a Read-Write-Split service on a master-slave mariadb cluster.
When I was trying to connect with DataGrip or DBeaver, I got the following error message:
[HY000][1927] Capability mismatch (bdd-master)
But when I use the mysql command line client, it works well.
Do you have any idea of what could be wrong?
MaxScale sends a Capability mismatch error when it detects that the client application requests a protocol capability that one of the backend databases cannot support. In general, this should not happen as MaxScale tries to mimic the backend database and calculates the capabilities so that these sort of mismatches do not happen.
There are some known bugs that can cause this, both in MaxScale as well as old versions of MariaDB and MySQL. Upgrading to the latest possible version of MaxScale should help solve any problems you might see.
Additionally, you should disable the query cache in the database if you are using MySQL as there is a bug in MySQL (and old MariaDB versions as well) that causes these sort of problems to appear.
It seems that is related to the router used (readwritesplit).
Datagrip send this command when it initiate the connection:
set autocommit=1, session_track_schema=1, sql_mode = concat(##sql_mode,',STRICT_TRANS_TABLES')
It seems that some of theses parameters are not supported by readwritesplit.
I have a problem with my ODBC connection in MS Access.
Here's the strange part,we have a shared MS Access Database and everything work so fine in the other computer but not in mine. As I check my MSJET version, its 4.0.9511.0. Does it matters?
This happens when I run one of the queries.
How am I going to solve this issue? Thanks.
Some ODBC connections pass the username of the active windows user, and if that is the case, one user may be authorized while the user you copied it to may not be. Try copying the ODBC connection string up so we can see what it looks like.
I support a group of developers that are telling me to setup a registry entry for an application that they made in asp.net to connect to our SQL backend. Would it not be better to do this from an ODBC connection? Is this lazy programming or is this common practice?
If all their connections are in registry entries how will I be able to spin up the DRP site in case we have an issue? Right now we replicate the content across and it would be a heck of a lot easier if the DB connections were in ODBC instead of having to redo all these registry entries. (there are multiple apps doing this).
Please fill me in. Thanks
Why are they not using the web.config to store connection strings? http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms178411.aspx
a few days we had a strange error with sqlite. We use a sqlite database on a network share with several computers accessing it. Our client reported, that the database is gone. A quick overview showed, that the database was still there but no computer could access it. It also showed a s3db-journal file indicating that someone is/was accessing the db when something happened. The thing that is strange - the s3db-journal file was locked by the file system (we could not copy/delete it). After restarting all applications, the locked file disappeared as it should be.
How does this happen? We would like to deduct somehow how our client got into this situation. We know, that there was a corrupt network cabeling to one of the computers.
Thank you for your help.
Tobias
To clarify this: several = up to 10 computer
From the "Appropriate uses for SQLite" page:
If you have many client programs accessing a common database over a network, you should consider using a client/server database engine instead of SQLite. SQLite will work over a network filesystem, but because of the latency associated with most network filesystems, performance will not be great. Also, the file locking logic of many network filesystems implementation contains bugs (on both Unix and Windows). If file locking does not work like it should, it might be possible for two or more client programs to modify the same part of the same database at the same time, resulting in database corruption. Because this problem results from bugs in the underlying filesystem implementation, there is nothing SQLite can do to prevent it.
A good rule of thumb is that you should avoid using SQLite in situations where the same database will be accessed simultaneously from many computers over a network filesystem.
It very well might be a bug in the network filesystem you're using. Either way, the SQLite developers explicitly recommend against using databases on network filesystems.
The issue is resolved. The database-component (zeos) threw an exception and we tried a rollback. Due to the way the component was designed, this is only allowed when you started a transaction. If you don't you get the locked s3db-journal file.
In the end we learned 2 things: never rollback when you did not start a transaction, second - there is a function InTransaction from zeos for that.
hoping someone has experience with both sql server and postgresql.
Between the two db's, which one is easier to scale?
Is creating a read only db that mirrors the main db easier/harder than sql server?
Seeing as sql server can get $$, I really want to look into postgresql.
Also, are the db access libraries written well for an asp.net application?
(please no comments on: do you need the scale, worry about scaling later, and don't optimize until you have scaling issues...I just want to learn from a theoretical standpoint thanks!)
Currently, setting up a read-only replica is probably easier with SQL Server. There's a lot of work going on to get hot standby and streaming replication part of the next release, though.
Regarding scaling, people are using PostgreSQL with massive databases. Skype uses PostgreSQL, and Yahoo has something based on PostgreSQL with several petabyte in it.
I've used Postgresql with C# and ASP.Net 2.0 and used the db provider from devart:
http://www.devart.com/dotconnect/postgresql/
The visual designer has a few teething difficulties but the connectivity was fine.
I have only used SQL Server and not much PostgreSQL, so I can only answer for SQL Server.
When scaling out SQL Server you have a couple of options. You can use peer to peer replication between databases, or you can have secondary read-only DB(s) as you mention. The last option is relatively straight-forward to set up using database mirroring or log shipping. Database mirroring also gives you the benefit of automatic switchover on primary DB failure. For an overview, look here:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/howtobuy/passive-server-failover-support.mspx
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc917680.aspx
http://blogs.technet.com/josebda/archive/2009/04/02/sql-server-2008-database-mirroring.aspx
As for licensing, you only need a license for the standby server if it is actively used for serving queries - you do not need one for a pure standby server.
If you are serious, you can set up a failover cluster with a SAN for storage, but that is not really a load balancing setup in itself.
Here are some links on the general scale up/out topic:
http://www.microsoft.com/sqlserver/2008/en/us/wp-sql-2008-performance-scale.aspx
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa479364.aspx
ASP.NET Libraries are obviously very well written for SQL Server, but I would believe there exists good alternatives for PostgreSQL as well.