Changes between Initial Version and Version 2 of Ticket #153


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Sep 2, 2012, 1:23:29 AM (12 years ago)
Author:
adehnert
Comment:

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • Ticket #153

    • Property Component changed from web to sql
    • Property Type changed from defect to enhancement
  • Ticket #153 – Description

    initial v2  
    1 If we really aim to be split between W20 and W91 in a way that adds ''useful'' redundancy, we need to do this. As far as I can tell, we have two options:
     1If we really aim to be split between W20 and W91 (see also #200) in a way that adds ''useful'' redundancy, we need to do this. As far as I can tell, we have two options:
    22 * Do [http://onlamp.com/pub/a/onlamp/2006/04/20/advanced-mysql-replication.html circular replication], i.e., A replicates to B, but B also replicates to A, even though you're not supposed to. This requires some hackery with auto_increment columns, and possibly other things, and given that we don't control users' code, I don't know how I feel about the reliability of this.
    33 * Set up [http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/mysql-cluster.html MySQL Cluster]. It uses its own database type (NDB) and [http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/mysql-cluster-overview-requirements.html by default requires all the memory ever] to store the entire database in memory, although apparently you can [http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/mysql-cluster-disk-data.html move non-indexed columns to disk] in 5.1. I am highly unsure whether that helps us enough, and taking up memory would be a violation of the principle that unused sites cost us only a couple megabytes on disk. But, if it works, [http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/mysql-cluster-replication-multi-master.html multimaster replication between clusters] is definitely supported. So we can stick two SQL servers in W20 and two in W91, set each pair up as a cluster, and replicate between them.