11-Aug-2008

MySQL 5.1
Now using MySQL 5.1 for a number of weeks (the watchdog log mentions the exact date and time: MYSQL051 Restarted 2008-07-21 21:12:13.96) and I must say: it really is an improvement; in both speed (much faster) and stability (hasn’t crashed since) it outruns the previous version. I cannot tell that having rebuilt the PHP MySQL extension against this new version makes a difference, but no doubt it does.
One issue that may well contribute to the speed is the fact that I didn’t change the settings on buffersize and number of buffers, like I did on the MySQL 4.1 configuration. It was needed at the time: after having limited these it became more stable, but not as much as I wanted, given trhe number of crashes that kept occurring. MySQL 5.1 appears stable enough – and well handling the load – that I can keep to the default setting. Which is a good thing.

One thing to keep in mind, though: Usernames are now case sentitive. At least, I didn’t notice the 4.1 version to be; logging in using the username in all lowercase, or capitalized, didn’t make a difference then. But now it saÿs “Bad password”, even when the password is right, if you enter the username mixed case.

For the rest
I have installed Servicepack 3 on Aphrodite, the Windows workstation; thought I had it done but the update history didn’t mention it. The advantage is I now have a full backup of the Windows directory.
I had some trouble with Demeter, last weekend: when working on a friend’s internet connection, the LAN interface seemed badly broken but it could well have been an issue with the ISP-supplied router that simply failed to deliver an IP-address to it. I don’t understand – the old router did get an address (but I couldn’t use it since the other old 3COM card is dead…). However, connecting it into my own network worked fine, as usual… Weird.
And there is Maya – the newly installed Ubuntu desktop. There actually is a problem, though minor. It has to do with the built-in ATI-based graphics card. I have my old 19” monitor hooked up, and when booting, the Ubuntu logo is nicely popping up on both the LCD screen and the monitor. But when the desktop is to be displayed, the monitor is no longer attached and I’ll have to work from the LCD screen. According the Ubuntu site, there would be something in the ATI driver, and ATI would be reluctant to publish data on the card. Though this might well be the case (and there may be good reasons for it), it’s a lame excuse if other issues could be overcome by reverse engineering. And this is such a basic issue, as far as I can tell, that there must be some kind of setting to enable the screen.
Well, I do have to update anyway, perhaps the issue is solved (but I have my doubts).
Going cheap
It’s very valid, no doubt. The friend I just talked about has an account with a cable company, that supplies television signal (their original business), telephone and internet acess. He can only afford limited cost, so his contract offers internet access with limited capacity. Fairly sufficient for his limited use. His major use is e-mail, and some surfing. he’s not downloading gigabites of film, and the few updates he gets for the virus scanner do not impact his use.
But the service seems to keep pace with the cost. The connection is not stable in terms of speed, and certainly not in terms of availability: either thelephone or internet, or, in some cases both, is gone. If it’s just the internet connection, to get to know that your internet connection is gone and how long that will take, is expensive, and mainly because of waiting. If the telephone connection is gone, there is no way contacting them except by e-mail – which will be answered the next day, or within 2 working days, and that doesn’t help much either – especiaclly if it happens on Friday night – after 22:00.
Let alone when both are down.
The only stable service is what they started with: televison signal.
But his problem was more complex.
It started with his mail problems: he couldn’t read his mail, or send mail by forms on a web-page.
He’s using a Hotmail account, and since Microsoft moved hotmail to “Live”, he was using the “light” version since the full version didn’t work: he’s using Windows2000 and cannot upgrade from IE 6.0 to IE7 (which requires WindowsXP). It was fine, until some weeks ago, he was unable to open his messages. I found out why: it’s some javascript that has to do it, and that didn’t work. His IE6.0 settings are such that javascript is enabled, and I dumped the page.
All it says is:
javascript:;
No scriptname or URL….

No wonder he didn’t see anything!
And not just on any mail message: whereever javascript was specified in the page, none of them mentioned a script to execute.
Moving to the full version solved the problem – after having re-installed IE 6.0, to solve another problem: he couldn’t download anything because some modules seemed gone. And he had to, for his anti-virus software needed to be, in order to get it to work with his renewed license.

What caused the empty “javascript:” specification? It could be a problem at Microsoft. Or would the ISP filter off anything, “to protect the innocent”?

(Before you want to comment: Another browser, even Linux, are being considered. Both are probelmatic. He requires 100% comptability where he uses his machine for work and study, and he only knows how to use the system. Nothing more.
So theer is no need to mention these…)