On Dec 12, 2007 4:46 PM, Karanbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matt Shields wrote:
> > I just got my master-master servers setup and we're running
> > mysql-server-5.0.48-1.el4.centos. I should also mention that Meetup
> > presentation was given by Patrick Galbraith who used to work for MySQ
Matt Shields wrote:
I just got my master-master servers setup and we're running
mysql-server-5.0.48-1.el4.centos. I should also mention that Meetup
presentation was given by Patrick Galbraith who used to work for MySQL
and was responsible for adding replication to MySQL.
sounds good, will you
I'm just beginning to consider using the Clustering available with
CentOS. We are going to spec out some new hardware, and after
reading most of the Clustering manuals, I have a small question
about MySQL.
I would like to run High Availability MySQL, in other words,
similar to how y
On Dec 11, 2007 12:42 PM, Karanbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matt Shields wrote:
> > the code). But I saw a presentation at the Boston MySQL Meetup.com
> > group about how to do master-master in mysql 5. We're about to
> > implement this in the next few weeks. If it's done this way both
After all the discussions regarding MySQL-style clustering (multi-
master etc), what about a "classic" HA cluster for MySQL? Since the
OP mentioned high availability, wouldn't the simplest solution be
failover clustering (ie. single master with failover, shared
storage, fenced nodes etc) v
Luke Dudney wrote:
After all the discussions regarding MySQL-style clustering (multi-master
etc), what about a "classic" HA cluster for MySQL? Since the OP
mentioned high availability, wouldn't the simplest solution be failover
clustering (ie. single master with failover, shared storage, fenced
On 11/12/2007 17:18, Steve Campbell wrote:
I'm just beginning to consider using the Clustering available with
CentOS. We are going to spec out some new hardware, and after reading
most of the Clustering manuals, I have a small question about MySQL.
I would like to run High Availability MySQL,
On Dec 11, 2007 6:10 PM, Karanbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matt Shields wrote:
> >
> > If this were master-slave, I'd probably do an LVM Snapshot and get a
> > fresh copy of the master db. The same could be done for
> > master-master.
> >
>
> has a live lvm-snapshot ever worked for you a
Ryan Ordway wrote:
( i think were just tryign to use mysql like too much of a real
database, while we seem to have clearly outgrown its capabilities :( )
I think the MySQL AB folks would object to that statement. ;-)
you mean the folks who scoffed at the idea transactions were important,
or
Ryan Ordway wrote:
>> Ryan Ordway wrote:
>>> Specifically, what makes you say it is a 5.1 only feature? What does 5.1
>>> give you that makes it easier than 5.0?
>>
>> specifically - rbr
> Ahh, true.
>
>> ( i think were just tryign to use mysql like too much of a real
>> database, while we seem to
Ryan Ordway wrote:
> The problem is you'll have some inconsistency between your master A's
> view of the database and the master B's view. You lose any changes to
> the data on master B. It would be nice to be able to merge any changes
> from B that hadn't made their way to master A yet. At that po
Matt Shields wrote:
>
> If this were master-slave, I'd probably do an LVM Snapshot and get a
> fresh copy of the master db. The same could be done for
> master-master.
>
has a live lvm-snapshot ever worked for you as a real move-data-around
policy ? you would, at the very least, need to flush i
On Dec 11, 2007, at 2:44 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
Ryan Ordway wrote:
Specifically, what makes you say it is a 5.1 only feature? What
does 5.1
give you that makes it easier than 5.0?
specifically - rbr
Ahh, true.
( i think were just tryign to use mysql like too much of a real
database
Ryan Ordway wrote:
> Specifically, what makes you say it is a 5.1 only feature? What does 5.1
> give you that makes it easier than 5.0?
specifically - rbr
we've had load of issues with mysql-5.0 recently ( i think were just
tryign to use mysql like too much of a real database, while we seem to
ha
On Dec 11, 2007, at 11:29 AM, Matt Shields wrote:
On Dec 11, 2007 1:39 PM, J. Potter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
... But I saw a presentation at the Boston MySQL Meetup.com
group about how to do master-master in mysql 5. We're about to
implement this in the next few weeks. ...
I've run
- master A is at position X
- master B, replicating from A, gets to position X
- master A syncs to its filesystem that it's at position X
- master A receives some inserts, and is now at position Y
- master B, replicating from A, gets to position Y
- master A crashes before the position ge
On Dec 11, 2007 1:39 PM, J. Potter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > ... But I saw a presentation at the Boston MySQL Meetup.com
> > group about how to do master-master in mysql 5. We're about to
> > implement this in the next few weeks. ...
>
> I've run into issues with crash recovery in master-
... But I saw a presentation at the Boston MySQL Meetup.com
group about how to do master-master in mysql 5. We're about to
implement this in the next few weeks. ...
I've run into issues with crash recovery in master-master mode:
- master A is at position X
- master B, replicating from A,
On Dec 11, 2007, at 9:42 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
Matt Shields wrote:
the code). But I saw a presentation at the Boston MySQL Meetup.com
group about how to do master-master in mysql 5. We're about to
implement this in the next few weeks. If it's done this way both
that is imho, a mysql-5.
Matt Shields wrote:
the code). But I saw a presentation at the Boston MySQL Meetup.com
group about how to do master-master in mysql 5. We're about to
implement this in the next few weeks. If it's done this way both
that is imho, a mysql-5.1 only feature, where you can have rbr and
multimast
On Dec 11, 2007 12:18 PM, Steve Campbell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm just beginning to consider using the Clustering available with
> CentOS. We are going to spec out some new hardware, and after reading
> most of the Clustering manuals, I have a small question about MySQL.
>
> I would like to
21 matches
Mail list logo