Re: large temp files created by mysql
I got a solution maybe step 1: mysql explain select * from users; ++-+---+--+---+--+-+--+--+---+ | id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra | ++-+---+--+---+--+-+--+--+---+ | 1 | SIMPLE | users | ALL | NULL | NULL | NULL| NULL | 32883093 | | ++-+---+--+---+--+-+--+--+---+ 1 row in set (0.00 sec) so you get the rows field Step2: select * from users, limit $r,1 What do you think? Is the only way i found what delays seconds not minuts. USERS is a 19GB Table for me. LD 2011/10/30 Jan Steinman j...@bytesmiths.com: Actually, having tried that, you still need the ORDER BY RAND() in there. Otherwise, I keep getting the same record over and over. But it surely cuts way down on the number of rows that need to be sorted. So if your table size is fairly stable, and you pick a good number for the WHERE constant, you can make this quite speedy. Still, it seems there should be a better way... On 30 Oct 11, at 18:51, Jan Steinman wrote: From: mos mo...@fastmail.fm At 10:34 AM 10/24/2011, you wrote: select id from table order by rand() limit 1; is doing as example a dumb temporary table with the full size Because it has to sort the entire table, then it returns the one row. This of course is extremely inefficient. :) That is absolutely incredible and counter-intuitive, and (as you say) extremely inefficient! This is used everywhere. Perhaps it is one of the biggest anti-patterns in SQL. I just checked two different SQL cookbook sites, and they both recommend ORDER BY RAND(). I just googled around a bit, and found that putting RAND() in the WHERE clause is very efficient: SELECT id FROM table WHERE RAND() 0.01 LIMIT 1 The comparison constant can be optimized for the number of rows you have. The above returns the first record of 1% of the table. If you have a million rows, you might want to bump that to something like 100 parts per million or so. But really, folks, this is something so ubiquitous and so recommended, why can't the query optimizer look out for ORDER BY RAND() and simply skip the table sort and just grab some record? (Hopefully using something better than Knuth's LCRNG...) Learning to think wholistically requires an overriding, or reversal, of much of the cultural heritage of the last few hundred years. -- David Holmgren Jan Steinman, EcoReality Co-op Within a few human generations, the low-energy patterns observable in natural landscapes will again form the basis of human system design after the richest deposits of fossil fuels and minerals are exhausted. -- David Holmgren Jan Steinman, EcoReality Co-op -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=luis.daniel.lu...@gmail.com -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
Re: Need help for performance tuning with Mysql
Alex Thank you for the advice. Probably, we will put index (key) on both columns. Thanks, Yu Alex Schaft さんは書きました: On 2012/05/24 07:37, Alex Schaft wrote: You are selecting a record based on the value of data_id and thold_enabled, but don't have an index on either? Add an index for both. If data_id is unique, then you would only need an index on that. Alex On second thought, an index on thold_enabled won't mean much I think, so either leave it off or create an index on data_id plus thold_enabled. Someone more knowledgeable may correct me. Alex -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
Re: Need help for performance tuning with Mysql
Johnny Thank you for the reply. Second, make sure your Innodb buffer pool is allocating as much ram as possible. I'd even go as far as adding another 8gb of ram to the server. The buffer pool setting is going to give you the best performance increase. The problem is mainly on MyISAM engine. Also, what kind of hard disks do you have the data files on? Raid? No raid? The server has no RAID. Thanks, Yu Johnny Withers さんは書きました: I don't see any attachments. First, I would upgrade to 5.5 as 5.0 is very old. The upgrade process is painless. Second, make sure your Innodb buffer pool is allocating as much ram as possible. I'd even go as far as adding another 8gb of ram to the server. The buffer pool setting is going to give you the best performance increase. Also, what kind of hard disks do you have the data files on? Raid? No raid? Sent from my iPad On May 22, 2012, at 9:08 PM, Yu Watanabe yu.watan...@jp.fujitsu.com wrote: Hello all. I would like to ask for advice with performance tuning with MySQL. Following are some data for my server. CPU: Xeon(TM) 2.8GHz (2CPUs - 8core total) Memory : 8GB OS : RHEL 4.4 x86_64 MySQL : MySQL 5.0.50sp1-enterprise Attached file # my.cnf.txt : my.cnf information # mysqlext_20120522131034.log : variable and status information from mysqladmin I have 2 database working with high load. I wanted to speed up my select and update queries not by optimizing the query itself but tuning the my.cnf. I have referred to following site, http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/server-status-variables.html and read Hiperformance Mysql vol.2 , and increased the following values, table_cache thread_cache_size tmp_table_size max_heap_table_size but made not much difference. According to the ps and sar result *1 PS result Date Time CPU% RSS VSZ 2012/5/22 21:00:39 109 294752 540028 *2 SAR Average CPU user 25% sys 5% io 3% I assume that MySQL can work more but currently not. I am considersing to off load 1 high load database to seperate process and make MySQL work in multiple process. It would be a great help if people in this forum can give us an adivice for the tuning. Best Regards, Yu Watanabe -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
Architectural Help
Hi All, I need architectural help for our requirement, We have nearly 50 data centre through out different cities from these data center application connect to central database server currently, there are conectivity and nework flcutions issues for different data center, so we comeup with solution each data center we should have local database server which will keep syncing with other server so that application doesnt fail , User data can be updated in any of server and should reflect in every server. Application consists of write/read/delete operations, Current writes each day central server 1million. Only 1/1000 need to be distrubuted acrross servce rest need to be in central server. How can we achive this ? solution needs very much real time data accepting nework lags. Solution Collect all changes in other 49 server into 1 central server(How can we collect data) 49 keeps updating data into local database from central server(Using Repliation Can be done) --Anupam
Re: Architectural Help
is the central database server just ONE server, to which all your 50 data center app connects On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Anupam Karmarkar sb_akarmar...@yahoo.comwrote: Hi All, I need architectural help for our requirement, We have nearly 50 data centre through out different cities from these data center application connect to central database server currently, there are conectivity and nework flcutions issues for different data center, so we comeup with solution each data center we should have local database server which will keep syncing with other server so that application doesnt fail , User data can be updated in any of server and should reflect in every server. Application consists of write/read/delete operations, Current writes each day central server 1million. Only 1/1000 need to be distrubuted acrross servce rest need to be in central server. How can we achive this ? solution needs very much real time data accepting nework lags. Solution Collect all changes in other 49 server into 1 central server(How can we collect data) 49 keeps updating data into local database from central server(Using Repliation Can be done) --Anupam
RE: Architectural Help
A few questions: which is more or a problem: network outages, network capacity or query latency? When you say near real-time do you need transactional consistent view on all 49 servers or can some lag be tolerated? Can any one of the 49 local servers potentially update/delete the same rows or data? Is there any natural segmentation point within the data? Do the data centers have diverse networks so that connections to some data centers may remain when others? In the event that a local data centre is totally isolated from the others what data should it be allowed to update? Do your applications produce/examine large data set querying by secondary keys or using tull text search? Are you in a position to modify the applications? __ From: Anupam Karmarkar [sb_akarmar...@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 10:17 AM To: mysql@lists.mysql.com Subject: Architectural Help Hi All, I need architectural help for our requirement, We have nearly 50 data centre through out different cities from these data center application connect to central database server currently, there are conectivity and nework flcutions issues for different data center, so we comeup with solution each data center we should have local database server which will keep syncing with other server so that application doesnt fail , User data can be updated in any of server and should reflect in every server. Application consists of write/read/delete operations, Current writes each day central server 1million. Only 1/1000 need to be distrubuted acrross servce rest need to be in central server. How can we achive this ? solution needs very much real time data accepting nework lags. Solution Collect all changes in other 49 server into 1 central server(How can we collect data) 49 keeps updating data into local database from central server(Using Repliation Can be done) --Anupam -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
Re: Architectural Help
Dear Nigel, Thank for reply.. See my comments below --Anupam From: Nigel Wood nw...@plus.net To: Anupam Karmarkar sb_akarmar...@yahoo.com; mysql@lists.mysql.com mysql@lists.mysql.com Sent: Thursday, 24 May 2012 3:35 PM Subject: RE: Architectural Help A few questions: which is more or a problem: network outages, network capacity or query latency? Network Outages is problem, between data centres When you say near real-time do you need transactional consistent view on all 49 servers or can some lag be tolerated? Some lag can be tolerated considering network outage Can any one of the 49 local servers potentially update/delete the same rows or data? Yes central server can update same row or local server but not at same time, Few data will be updated in central location and others majorly in local.One Application Writes in Centeral and Others in local, Local app and central app shares some data. Is there any natural segmentation point within the data? No Do the data centers have diverse networks so that connections to some data centers may remain when others? Yes, we have diverse nework , so connectivity will be avaiable in other data centers. In the event that a local data centre is totally isolated from the others what data should it be allowed to update? Loca application should always write in local database, Central Application Updated will not be available to local. Do your applications produce/examine large data set querying by secondary keys or using tull text search? We dont have text search or we dont query large data Are you in a position to modify the applications? No, Micro changes ok __ From: Anupam Karmarkar [sb_akarmar...@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 10:17 AM To: mysql@lists.mysql.com Subject: Architectural Help Hi All, I need architectural help for our requirement, We have nearly 50 data centre through out different cities from these data center application connect to central database server currently, there are conectivity and nework flcutions issues for different data center, so we comeup with solution each data center we should have local database server which will keep syncing with other server so that application doesnt fail , User data can be updated in any of server and should reflect in every server. Application consists of write/read/delete operations, Current writes each day central server 1million. Only 1/1000 need to be distrubuted acrross servce rest need to be in central server. How can we achive this ? solution needs very much real time data accepting nework lags. Solution Collect all changes in other 49 server into 1 central server(How can we collect data) 49 keeps updating data into local database from central server(Using Repliation Can be done) --Anupam -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
RE: large temp files created by mysql
Maybe. 1. The Rows is approximate, so you could over-shoot or under-shoot the end of the table. 2. OFFSET (limit $r,1) still has to scan $r rows. 3. SELECT * with an OFFSET will read the entire rows. SELECT `foo`, where `foo` is indexed, but not the InnoDB PRIMARY KEY, will scan only the INDEX(foo). This is likely to be much faster. But you are unlikely to do that unless foo is UNIQUE. A slight improvement (addressing both issues) is to decide which end to approach from. But scanning from the end needs an ORDER BY, preferably on the PRIMARY KEY. etc. -Original Message- From: Luis Daniel Lucio Quiroz [mailto:luis.daniel.lu...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 12:00 AM To: Jan Steinman Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com Subject: Re: large temp files created by mysql I got a solution maybe step 1: mysql explain select * from users; ++-+---+--+---+--+-+--- ---+--+---+ | id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra | ++-+---+--+---+--+-+--- ---+--+---+ | 1 | SIMPLE | users | ALL | NULL | NULL | NULL| NULL | 32883093 | | ++-+---+--+---+--+-+--- ---+--+---+ 1 row in set (0.00 sec) so you get the rows field Step2: select * from users, limit $r,1 What do you think? Is the only way i found what delays seconds not minuts. USERS is a 19GB Table for me. LD 2011/10/30 Jan Steinman j...@bytesmiths.com: Actually, having tried that, you still need the ORDER BY RAND() in there. Otherwise, I keep getting the same record over and over. But it surely cuts way down on the number of rows that need to be sorted. So if your table size is fairly stable, and you pick a good number for the WHERE constant, you can make this quite speedy. Still, it seems there should be a better way... On 30 Oct 11, at 18:51, Jan Steinman wrote: From: mos mo...@fastmail.fm At 10:34 AM 10/24/2011, you wrote: select id from table order by rand() limit 1; is doing as example a dumb temporary table with the full size Because it has to sort the entire table, then it returns the one row. This of course is extremely inefficient. :) That is absolutely incredible and counter-intuitive, and (as you say) extremely inefficient! This is used everywhere. Perhaps it is one of the biggest anti- patterns in SQL. I just checked two different SQL cookbook sites, and they both recommend ORDER BY RAND(). I just googled around a bit, and found that putting RAND() in the WHERE clause is very efficient: SELECT id FROM table WHERE RAND() 0.01 LIMIT 1 The comparison constant can be optimized for the number of rows you have. The above returns the first record of 1% of the table. If you have a million rows, you might want to bump that to something like 100 parts per million or so. But really, folks, this is something so ubiquitous and so recommended, why can't the query optimizer look out for ORDER BY RAND() and simply skip the table sort and just grab some record? (Hopefully using something better than Knuth's LCRNG...) Learning to think wholistically requires an overriding, or reversal, of much of the cultural heritage of the last few hundred years. -- David Holmgren Jan Steinman, EcoReality Co-op Within a few human generations, the low-energy patterns observable in natural landscapes will again form the basis of human system design after the richest deposits of fossil fuels and minerals are exhausted. -- David Holmgren Jan Steinman, EcoReality Co-op -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=luis.daniel.lu...@gmail.com -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
RE: large temp files created by mysql
For my propouses aprox is fine. I guess for others it doesnt
El may 24, 2012 9:59 a.m., Rick James rja...@yahoo-inc.com escribió:
Maybe.
1. The Rows is approximate, so you could over-shoot or under-shoot the
end of the table.
2. OFFSET (limit $r,1) still has to scan $r rows.
3. SELECT * with an OFFSET will read the entire rows. SELECT `foo`, where
`foo` is indexed, but not the InnoDB PRIMARY KEY, will scan only the
INDEX(foo). This is likely to be much faster. But you are unlikely to do
that unless foo is UNIQUE.
A slight improvement (addressing both issues) is to decide which end to
approach from. But scanning from the end needs an ORDER BY, preferably on
the PRIMARY KEY.
etc.
-Original Message-
From: Luis Daniel Lucio Quiroz [mailto:luis.daniel.lu...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 12:00 AM
To: Jan Steinman
Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: large temp files created by mysql
I got a solution maybe
step 1:
mysql explain select * from users;
++-+---+--+---+--+-+---
---+--+---+
| id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len |
ref | rows | Extra |
++-+---+--+---+--+-+---
---+--+---+
| 1 | SIMPLE | users | ALL | NULL | NULL | NULL|
NULL | 32883093 | |
++-+---+--+---+--+-+---
---+--+---+
1 row in set (0.00 sec)
so you get the rows field
Step2:
select * from users, limit $r,1
What do you think? Is the only way i found what delays seconds not
minuts. USERS is a 19GB Table for me.
LD
2011/10/30 Jan Steinman j...@bytesmiths.com:
Actually, having tried that, you still need the ORDER BY RAND() in
there. Otherwise, I keep getting the same record over and over. But it
surely cuts way down on the number of rows that need to be sorted.
So if your table size is fairly stable, and you pick a good number
for the WHERE constant, you can make this quite speedy.
Still, it seems there should be a better way...
On 30 Oct 11, at 18:51, Jan Steinman wrote:
From: mos mo...@fastmail.fm
At 10:34 AM 10/24/2011, you wrote:
select id from table order by rand() limit 1; is doing as example
a
dumb temporary table with the full size
Because it has to sort the entire table, then it returns the one
row. This of course is extremely inefficient. :)
That is absolutely incredible and counter-intuitive, and (as you
say) extremely inefficient!
This is used everywhere. Perhaps it is one of the biggest anti-
patterns in SQL. I just checked two different SQL cookbook sites,
and they both recommend ORDER BY RAND().
I just googled around a bit, and found that putting RAND() in the
WHERE clause is very efficient:
SELECT id FROM table WHERE RAND() 0.01 LIMIT 1
The comparison constant can be optimized for the number of rows you
have. The above returns the first record of 1% of the table. If you
have a million rows, you might want to bump that to something like 100
parts per million or so.
But really, folks, this is something so ubiquitous and so
recommended, why can't the query optimizer look out for ORDER BY
RAND() and simply skip the table sort and just grab some record?
(Hopefully using something better than Knuth's LCRNG...)
Learning to think wholistically requires an overriding, or reversal,
of much of the cultural heritage of the last few hundred years. --
David Holmgren
Jan Steinman, EcoReality Co-op
Within a few human generations, the low-energy patterns observable in
natural landscapes will again form the basis of human system design
after the richest deposits of fossil fuels and minerals are
exhausted.
-- David Holmgren
Jan Steinman, EcoReality Co-op
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:
http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=luis.daniel.lu...@gmail.com
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
RE: Need help for performance tuning with Mysql
Thanks. I got tired of answering the same questions about buffer_pool and
key_buffer over and over on forums.mysql.com; now I just point people at that
page.
INT(1) and INT(50) are identical -- and take 4 bytes. See TINYINT, BIGINT,
etc. Also, UNSIGNED is probably wanted in more places than you have it.
555KB is not very big. But a table scan (as indicated by the EXPLAIN) costs
something.
select * -- Is this what you are really fetching? If not, we can
discuss a covering index.
from thold_data
where thold_enabled='on' -- 2-valued flag? Not likely to be useful in an
index, esp. not by itself
AND data_id = 91633; -- Probably the best bet.
Recommend:
INDEX(data_id) -- or UNIQUE, if it is unique
INDEX(data_id, thold_enabled) -- or the opposite order; this probably would
not be noticeable better.
`notify_default` enum('on','off') default NULL
Did you really mean to have 3 values (on, off, NULL)?
-Original Message-
From: Yu Watanabe [mailto:yu.watan...@jp.fujitsu.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2012 7:10 PM
To: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: Need help for performance tuning with Mysql
Rick
Thank you for the reply.
1. There are only a few things worth tuning -- see
http://mysql.rjweb.org/doc.php/memory (they don't include the ones you
tried)
The page is really cool. Its very simple and easy to understand.
2. Instead INDEXes and schema design must be studied. Please provide:
SHOW CREATE TABLE
| thold_data | CREATE TABLE `thold_data` (
`id` int(11) NOT NULL auto_increment,
`rra_id` int(11) NOT NULL default '0',
`data_id` int(11) NOT NULL default '0',
`thold_hi` varchar(100) default NULL,
`thold_low` varchar(100) default NULL,
`thold_fail_trigger` int(10) unsigned default NULL,
`thold_fail_count` int(11) NOT NULL default '0',
`thold_alert` int(1) NOT NULL default '0',
`thold_enabled` enum('on','off') NOT NULL default 'on',
`bl_enabled` enum('on','off') NOT NULL default 'off',
`bl_ref_time` int(50) unsigned default NULL,
`bl_ref_time_range` int(10) unsigned default NULL,
`bl_pct_down` int(10) unsigned default NULL,
`bl_pct_up` int(10) unsigned default NULL,
`bl_fail_trigger` int(10) unsigned default NULL,
`bl_fail_count` int(11) unsigned default NULL,
`bl_alert` int(2) NOT NULL default '0',
`lastread` varchar(100) default NULL,
`oldvalue` varchar(100) NOT NULL default '',
`repeat_alert` int(10) unsigned default NULL,
`notify_default` enum('on','off') default NULL,
`notify_extra` varchar(255) default NULL,
`host_id` int(10) default NULL,
`syslog_priority` int(2) default '3',
`cdef` int(11) NOT NULL default '0',
PRIMARY KEY (`id`),
KEY `rra_id` (`rra_id`)
) ENGINE=MyISAM AUTO_INCREMENT=69641 DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 |
SHOW TABLE SIZE
You must be mentioning about the show table status
mysql show table status where name = thold_data;
+++-++--++-
+-+--+---+-
---+-+-
+-+---+--+
+-+
| Name | Engine | Version | Row_format | Rows | Avg_row_length |
Data_length | Max_data_length | Index_length | Data_free |
Auto_increment | Create_time | Update_time | Check_time
| Collation | Checksum | Create_options | Comment |
+++-++--++-
+-+--+---+-
---+-+-
+-+---+--+
+-+
| thold_data | MyISAM | 10 | Dynamic| 6161 | 90 |
555128 | 281474976710655 | 140288 | 0 | 70258 |
2012-05-24 10:41:47 | 2012-05-24 10:47:19 | 2012-05-24
10:41:47 | latin1_swedish_ci | NULL || |
+++-++--++-
+-+--+---+-
---+-+-
+-+---+--+
+-+
1 row in set (0.00 sec)
EXPLAIN SELECT
I have seen the following select query in the slow query log.
I also saw update queries as well.
mysql explain select * from thold_data where thold_enabled='on' AND
mysql data_id = 91633;
++-++--+---+--+
-+--+--+-+
| id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len
| ref | rows | Extra |
++-++--+---+--+
-+--+--+-+
| 1 | SIMPLE | thold_data | ALL | NULL
RE: Architectural Help
I deal with dozens of systems, all doing cross-country or cross-ocean replication. The only viable approach (that we have deployed in production) is * Dual-master, single writer -- That is, all 49 clients write to one machine * The two masters are geographically separate. * Failover involves switching to the 'other' master. It is _not_ fully automated. * Slaves, as needed, scattered around the world -- This provides read scaling. 1M writes per day -- that is an average of 12/sec. Yawn. Replication delay -- you probably will almost never see any. Network outages -- one of many things that can cause trouble. The sooner you write the data _and_ copy it to a _remote_ site, the sooner you are immune to floods, tornados, cyclones, power outages, motherboard death, etc. -Original Message- From: Anupam Karmarkar [mailto:sb_akarmar...@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 3:39 AM To: Nigel Wood Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com Subject: Re: Architectural Help Dear Nigel, Thank for reply.. See my comments below --Anupam From: Nigel Wood nw...@plus.net To: Anupam Karmarkar sb_akarmar...@yahoo.com; mysql@lists.mysql.com mysql@lists.mysql.com Sent: Thursday, 24 May 2012 3:35 PM Subject: RE: Architectural Help A few questions: which is more or a problem: network outages, network capacity or query latency? Network Outages is problem, between data centres When you say near real-time do you need transactional consistent view on all 49 servers or can some lag be tolerated? Some lag can be tolerated considering network outage Can any one of the 49 local servers potentially update/delete the same rows or data? Yes central server can update same row or local server but not at same time, Few data will be updated in central location and others majorly in local.One Application Writes in Centeral and Others in local, Local app and central app shares some data. Is there any natural segmentation point within the data? No Do the data centers have diverse networks so that connections to some data centers may remain when others? Yes, we have diverse nework , so connectivity will be avaiable in other data centers. In the event that a local data centre is totally isolated from the others what data should it be allowed to update? Loca application should always write in local database, Central Application Updated will not be available to local. Do your applications produce/examine large data set querying by secondary keys or using tull text search? We dont have text search or we dont query large data Are you in a position to modify the applications? No, Micro changes ok __ From: Anupam Karmarkar [sb_akarmar...@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 10:17 AM To: mysql@lists.mysql.com Subject: Architectural Help Hi All, I need architectural help for our requirement, We have nearly 50 data centre through out different cities from these data center application connect to central database server currently, there are conectivity and nework flcutions issues for different data center, so we comeup with solution each data center we should have local database server which will keep syncing with other server so that application doesnt fail , User data can be updated in any of server and should reflect in every server. Application consists of write/read/delete operations, Current writes each day central server 1million. Only 1/1000 need to be distrubuted acrross servce rest need to be in central server. How can we achive this ? solution needs very much real time data accepting nework lags. Solution Collect all changes in other 49 server into 1 central server(How can we collect data) 49 keeps updating data into local database from central server(Using Repliation Can be done) --Anupam -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
