I use this kind of clustering, but there is a performance penalty. Not so high, but...
Also, in the meantime, how about try a double-chained t_replicate configuration in conjunction with DB cache? In case of a double replication, I understand that it would only update the DB. Am I thinking in a, at least, reasonable way? Edson. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Andreas Granig > Sent: quarta-feira, 10 de maio de 2006 17:01 > To: Bogdan-Andrei Iancu > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Users] clustering > > Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote: > > yes, that's right - I will take a look to see how difficult is to change > > t_replicate() to be able to sent to more destinations in parallel. > > I'd really encourage everybody evaluating a clustered solution to try > cacheless usrloc in combination with mysql-cluster. Scales very well, > without the side-effect of inevitable usrloc inconsistency... > > Just my 2 cents, > Andy > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > [email protected] > http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users _______________________________________________ Users mailing list [email protected] http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
