[Digikam-users] Mysql/MariaDb database expert needs...

[Gilles Caulier]

2015-11-12 15:30 GMT+01:00 Henrique Santos Fernandes <sf.rique at gmail.com>:

>
>> As, the privilegdes cannot be granted from users space, but must be done
>> by server admin, the internal solution is a non sense. Sqlite do the stuff
>> as well in this situation. As i said previously, trying to run digiKam with
>> an internal mysql server will generate a lots of problems, a lots of
>> reports, and finaly, only if user is an expert, this will not possible to
>> use this way.
>>
>> So i will drop internal mysql support for 5.0.0
>>
>
> All right.. i mean, it is easier to develop like this, one solution only
>
>>
>> yes. The way to do it il given below :
>>
>> CREATE DATABASE digikamdb;GRANT ALL PRIVILEGES ON digikamdb.* TO
>> 'digikamuser'@'localhost' IDENTIFIED BY 'digikamuserpassword'; FLUSH
>> PRIVILEGES; GRANT SUPER ON *.* TO 'digikamuser'@'localhost'; FLUSH
>> PRIVILEGES;
>>
>
> Why do digikam need super?
>

I don't know. I just found this solution in a bugzilla entry and it work.

Someone like you have posted the same question without a response.

Here my knowledge of mysql is limited.


>
>
>> The here another pending and very important question :
>>
>> With digiKam 5.0.0, we will have 3 database to manage :
>>
>> 1/ Core DB
>> 2/ Thumbnails DB
>> 3/ Face DB (since libkface is merged in digiKam core)
>>
>> For each digiKam database we can use a specific name. By default i used
>> the name name (digikamdb) here to test, and it work for Core and Thumbnails
>> DB. Face DB don't work and investiguations are under progress...
>>
>> So, the question is : why we have the capability to separate Core,
>> Thumbnails, and Face DB with different name (as for ex digikamcoredb,
>> digkamthumbsdb, and digikamfacedb) ?
>>
>
> I think this is purely organization related right?
> I dont realy see any reason why it should be separated.
>

So the question still pending...


>
>
>>
>> In my /var/lib/mysql, i can see separated subfolders to host DB ? What's
>> the advantage ? backup facilities ? Performances ? What's must be the
>> default settings : common name or separated name ?
>>
>
> Having separated databases, you will have to adjust the user  grant
> permissions for each case as well.
> Same for backup, now we have to backup 3 databases for backup digikam.
>

in case of you use separated DB name. Else, all is mixed in same dir.


>
> As far as i know, there is no performance gain in any situation, but you
> gain complexity as you will need to create the mutiple users and also, you
> may be in a situation where you are not sure in wich database this "data"
> should be.
>
> I would vote for a single database, but i am no expert and thougt it was a
> design choice to have multple databases.
>
> One reason to have it not as the same, if you wish to use thumbtail on
> disk and the rest on mysql, but i guess this will introduce more problens
> than any real advantages.
>

thumbnail on disk will be stored in sqlite DB in this case. No real
advantage, and impossible to do currently : all mysql or all sqlite, that
all.

Gilles Caulier
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/digikam-users/attachments/20151112/6f92d471/attachment.html>