On Thursday 24 July 2008, Shane Hathaway wrote:
> Cool. Memcache could do a whole lot more for us if its API had a notion
> of MVCC. I think that might not be as complicated as it sounds. :-)
Brian told me that MVCC is internally implemented. He will be in the office
next week and I'll have a m
On 27. Jul 2008, at 18:48, Shane Hathaway wrote:
I would expect that when a slave goes down, the slave must replay
all of the statements since the beginning of a transaction,
including the statements that create temporary tables. Does it not
work that way?
Not in MySQL anyway. MySQL know
Stefan H. Holek wrote:
In MySQL, temporary tables live in RAM. So when a slave goes down,
its copy of the table vanishes. When the slave comes back up the log
may still contain commands using the temporary table however, causing
execution to barf (and replication to stop). To fix this condit
This is not a problem of the ZODB or relstorage, but specific to how
MySQL handles a) replication and b) temporary tables.
MySQL employs a log-based replication mechanism. This means the
replication slave replays the commands performed on the master to
keep its copy of the database in sync.
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Thursday 24 July 2008, Shane Hathaway wrote:
P.S.: I am quite excited about the memcached support. Does it "just
work"? I.e. can I run my ZODB in RAM now? ;-)
I expect the new memcache support to be safe for everyone to use, but we
still require the main d
Stephan Richter wrote:
We should get Brian Aker into this discussion, since is one of the main
architects of MySQL and one of the founders of memcached.
As Shane knows, I have some access to Brian these days, so we could have an
online meeting talking about it.
Cool. Memcache could do a who
On Thursday 24 July 2008, Shane Hathaway wrote:
> > P.S.: I am quite excited about the memcached support. Does it "just
> > work"? I.e. can I run my ZODB in RAM now? ;-)
>
> I expect the new memcache support to be safe for everyone to use, but we
> still require the main database to be connected
Stefan H. Holek wrote:
I have made two checkins to relstorage 1.1 branch:
It's really cool to have another contributor. Thanks! 1.1c1 has
already been tagged, so I fixed the change log.
[1] http://svn.zope.org/relstorage/branches/1.1/?rev=88789&view=rev
[2] http://svn.zope.org/relstorage/
