Stewart, thanks for the feedback. That this was simple for Drizzle is encouraging to hear.
Is there a proposal somewhere for eliminating the need for fsyncs on a slave? As I understand, MWL#164 still requires the fsync. On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 8:38 PM, Vadim Tkachenko <[email protected]> wrote: > Stewart, > > I would pretty much like to see benchmarks numbers, especially > under IO-bound workload before agreeing that it performs well. > > > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 5:05 PM, Stewart Smith <[email protected]> > wrote: >> Kristian Nielsen <[email protected]> writes: >>> You will be writing your data *6* times: To the real table, when flushing >>> its >>> buffer pool pages. To the double-write buffer while flushing, and to the >>> redo >>> log before flushing. Then to the binlog table, and before that to the redo >>> log >>> and the doublewrite buffer. I could never reconcile myself with this. >> >> Mind you, it performs really quite well due to the reduced fsync()s and >> (at least in Drizzle code) was rather trivial to implement. Big bang for >> buck :) >> >> -- >> Stewart Smith > > > > -- > Vadim Tkachenko, CTO, Percona > Phone +1-925-400-7377, Skype: vadimtk153 > Schedule meeting: http://meetme.so/VadimTkachenko > > Join us in Santa Clara for the annual Percona Live MySQL Conference & Expo > 2013! > http://www.percona.com/live/mysql-conference-2013/ > > Looking for Replication with Data Consistency? > Try Percona XtraDB Cluster! _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~maria-developers Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~maria-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
