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 MySQL
and
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 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
that
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
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 you can run
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 run
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
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
- 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
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
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
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
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 in
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 point
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 have clearly
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
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 as a real
17 matches
Mail list logo
