Paul J Stevens wrote:
Simon Gray wrote:
Worth a thought or completely silly?
Worth a thought *and* not-quite-silly but it still wont do. In fact I did an
implementation of this once. There will still be ample opportunity for one
server to store a UID that is below the MAX(uid). *Any* chance of such an
occurence is a fatal blow to your algorithm.
My more fundamental conclusion was that the whole master-master dream is a myth:
it doesn't solve anything. It doesn't scale at all.
Does it offer higher throughput?
Does it offer lower latencies?
Does it offer higher reliablity?
Does it offer higher availability?
think about it.
Its nice to know I sometimes don't talk rubbish ;p
I'm thinking it might be more towards the disaster recovery route or if
you are running a large network and have servers spread over various
sites and are running anycast.
Partitioning is probably a better way for performance imho.
SG
_______________________________________________
DBmail mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailman.fastxs.nl/mailman/listinfo/dbmail
