, hello emile, hello piotras
(sorry for the double posting under [EMAIL PROTECTED], The user
list was the right one)
> And now just imagine what can I do when I make manage SG
> in one host? Not hosts in one SG.
>
On 7th september I also participated on the former thread about
utilization of SG. Though I think I understood the concept of SG
I still have a big question about the manual section 8.1.(1). A
reduction of database connection load is promised by splitting
databases. But I'm missing an example in practice that shares databases
between different hosts AND machines. I would like to use different
databases from different machines in one central midgard instance. How
are different databases from different machines (hosts) addressed in
order to join under a central administration of midgard (e.g. Asgard) ?
There is a database directive in the midgard.conf file included in
apaches httpd.conf. Maybe this directive should be distributed into
several virtual hosts ? Is there a syntax example on this directive for
another mysql database on a different machine ?
Maybe I should open a new thread for my question. But maybe piotras
only mixed up SG and hosts due to the virtual character of midgards
"hosts" objects. If I understood only some of his requests here he only
wants to join different "hosts" from different machines in a single
sitegroup (piotras ?). Unfortunately midgard "hosts" objects always
belong to the same machine. Is there a chance to 'mount' different
databases from different hosts to a single sitegroup ?
However the manual tells me about sitegroups that split databases and
therefor reduce connection loads. In my case I don't need so much
performance improvement. But splitting of the midgard databases becomes
already important if two sites had no chance for synchronized tables
from the project start.
Thats why they have to be merged while both tables e.g. for page
records already having duplicate record-ids. The idea of sitegroups may
have been to work as a secondary key in addition to the record-ids as
primary keys. But I don't think that they allow duplicate record-ids.
However different databases as mentioned in the manual would be the
right way. How can it be applied from different hosts ?
thanks for your answer, dieter
--- Begin Message ---
, hello emile, hello piotras
> And now just imagine what can I do when I make manage SG
> in one host? Not hosts in one SG.
>
On 7th september I also participated on the former thread about
utilization of SG. Though I think I understood the concept of SG
I still have a big question about the manual section 8.1.(1). A
reduction of database connection load is promised by splitting
databases. But I'm missing an example in practice that shares databases
between different hosts AND machines. I would like to use different
databases from different machines in one central midgard instance. How
are different databases from different machines (hosts) addressed in
order to join under a central administration of midgard (e.g. Asgard) ?
There is a database directive in the midgard.conf file included in
apaches httpd.conf. Maybe this directive should be distributed into
several virtual hosts ? Is there a syntax example on this directive for
another mysql database on a different machine ?
Maybe I should open a new thread for my question. But maybe piotras
only mixed up SG and hosts due to the virtual character of midgards
"hosts" objects. If I understood only some of his requests here he only
wants to join different "hosts" from different machines in a single
sitegroup (piotras ?). Unfortunately midgard "hosts" objects always
belong to the same machine. Is there a chance to 'mount' different
databases from different hosts to a single sitegroup ?
However the manual tells me about sitegroups that split databases and
therefor reduce connection loads. In my case I don't need so much
performance improvement. But splitting of the midgard databases becomes
already important if two sites had no chance for synchronized tables
from the project start.
Thats why they have to be merged while both tables e.g. for page
records already having duplicate record-ids. The idea of sitegroups may
have been to work as a secondary key in addition to the record-ids as
primary keys. But I don't think that they allow duplicate record-ids.
However different databases as mentioned in the manual would be the
right way. How can it be applied from different hosts ?
thanks for your answer, dieter
--- End Message ---
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
