Perrin Harkins wrote:
On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 8:05 AM, Issac Goldstand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Also, do people have concrete
benchmarks of keeping a read-only replication mysql on the webservers vs a
single read/write shared mysql server?
Any time you can spread the reads over multiple servers it will help.
This is particularly true for MyISAM tables where reads blocks
writers. (InnoDB tables behave like Oracle and Postgres, with a MVCC
model.)
Right - I know that in theory, but was worried about the disk/ram/cpu
overhead of replicating the writes to all of the slave servers
offsetting that benefit...
I also thought to buffer common DB query results (like php's sessions) in
memcached on reads
I suspect that caching on the level of db queries will get annoying if
you try to do it everywhere. You'd be better off caching at a higher
"object" level if you can, or just caching specific high-value
queries.
Well, yes, I meant the objects or data structures that result from the
DB query - not the query or the result itself (I'd use Mysql's query
cache for that anyway, not memcached).
Thanks for your input Perrin.
Issac
- Perrin
