|
Francois JEANMOUGIN wanted us to know:
>http://dev.mysql.com/tech-resources/articles/mysql-cluster-for-two-servers.ht
>ml
>I'm currently evaluating this solution, which as passed the "case study"
>test. I will implement it at the end of this month. I would like to know if
>anyone here have any (bad or good) experience with such MySQL setup.
Yes, bad. Things like 'DESCRIBE table' would give erratic results.
Required a beta version of perl-DBD.
Performance was good though. We had a 2 node cluster with plans to
scale upwards. I think once supporting code stabilizes it will be a
good solution. I like the way they keep things in memory because RAM is
cheap.
We are also evaluating the true clustering solution provided by Emic
Networks. It is fantastic in my opinion, but it's not cheap. It
requires custom configuration of your switches and routers to handle
multicast MACs, a virtual gateway, and some VLAN'ing. It works well
though and scales well. If your system has more than 50% reads, it will
work well for you.
--
Regards... Todd
OS X: We've been fighting the "It's a mac" syndrome with upper management
for years now. Lately we've taken to just referring to new mac
installations as "Unix" installations when presenting proposals and
updates. For some reason, they have no problem with that. -- /.
Linux kernel 2.6.8.1-12mdkenterprise 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
|
