On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 4:49 PM, Brent Clark <brentgclarkl...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On 11/03/2010 16:52, Krishna Chandra Prajapati wrote: > >> Hi Brent >> >> You can visit the below link. >> >> >> http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2009/06/09/mysql-proxy-urgh-performance-and-scalability/ >> > > Well thats disappointing. > > sigh > So what are we supposed to use for loadbalancing mysql. > Throw plenty of servers at it :-) If you put three servers behind the proxy, you'll get the same performance as a single server, every additional server is performance benefit :-D Seriously, though, I don't have much faith in these kind of things (in the context of read/write splitting, that is), because the proxy can never know wether there'll be a write-request in the session without notification from the client anyways. If you have to modify your application anyway, just do it toroughly (you have to fish out the connects that will write in either case, so that's half the work done) and make your application fully slave-aware. That also allows you to tighten security by assigning a select-only user for the read connections, diminishing the chances of a succesfull sql injection. If you're wondering about loadbalancing between read-only slaves, you don't need a SQL aware proxy, just balance at level 4 using ldirectord or a hardware loadbalancer with sticky sessions. -- Bier met grenadyn Is als mosterd by den wyn Sy die't drinkt, is eene kwezel Hy die't drinkt, is ras een ezel
