|
Database cluster is different from the http protocol.
In most database servers, there is a transaction log
file which has all the transactions. Until the time the
transactions committed to the table, this one log will
handle all the transactions from clients to the database
server. It is always good idea NOT put this log on a
NFS file server, since the speed is important.
How could clustering handle one log file on a server
when one wants to have more servers to handle
the transactions? Any mis-management to this log
file will meant the whole database is screwed.
At 01:02 PM 2/1/00 -0600, Ron King wrote:
>Hello,
>
>I haven't found much on Inktomi (Hotbot's) original architecture, but I
>did
>find 'Cluster-Based Scalable Network Services'. In this paper they say:
>'Hotbot workers statically partition the search-engine database for load
>
>balancing'. 'Each worker handles a subset of the database proportional
>to its CPU power..'
>
>I want to use a cluster of 32-bit Linux systems to handle a large
>database
>of several hundred million web pages. I think this would require some
>sort
>of cluster front end, because all data queries would have to be sent to
>all
>of the nodes, and the results from the nodes combined before being
>presented
>to the user.
>
>Is LVS suitable for something like this? If not, can anyone recommend an
>
>existing open source system that can do this?
>
>Regards,
>
>Ron King
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: lvs-users-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>For additional commands, e-mail: lvs-users-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
----------------------------------------------------------------------
LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lvs-users-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: lvs-users-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
