On Tuesday 20 August 2002 06:39 am, Luis Calero wrote: NFS locking is ALWAYS problematical. You might have no problems, you might also be instantly in hell.
Its really hard actually to answer your question. NFS implementations vary greatly in their quality. In addition it depends on the NICs you have. Some NICs create a lot more CPU load than others. 1st thing to do would be to test with a dummy database and see if the setup will work at all. Then you'd need to load test your NFS server, tune it, and see what you can get out of it for throughput. Finally you'd have to test the actual setup and find out if it really works better. Needless to say most sysadmins find this sort of thing to be too much trouble and just upgrade their hardware! > Hi... I've got the folowing question, our servers are running pretty > busy these days and our main DB server is taking high load peaks (memory > is OK but the cpu has almost no idle time). We have another spare server > and I'm thinking about mounting the database over NFS (100mb LAN) to the > spare server and using both as frontends to the DB. Both servers are > supposed to do reads and updates to the DB, but i'm concerned with the > updates of the server using NFS. > > Are NFS locks safe enough to run this kind of setup? Is this going to be > an advantage or will suffer from other kinds of problems? Both boxes are > PIII dual 1Ghz / 1Gb ram, Linux 2.4.16, MySQL 3.23.52 > > Thanx --------------------------------------------------------------------- Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
