Thanks Jonas,
Are the storage requirements switching between innodb table spaces and
NDB spaces going to change? I know when I went from myisam to innodb
our requirements nearly doubled. Might by chance the requirements
decrease with NDB?
Thanks again,
Richard
On Wed, 2004-07-14 at 16:25, Jonas Oreland wrote:
> Richard F. Rebel wrote:
> > I recently joined the list to ask a similar question.
> >
> > I currently store about 7 billion rows in about 400GB of InnoDB table
> > space, we use the existing mysql replication to replicate to another
> > system.
> >
> > My question is, does mysql cluster keep all data in RAM? Thusly my
> > cluster set up would require servers totally 400GB of ram, or maybe even
> > 800GB if I want the system to have two copies of everything for
> > redundancy? It's around 10k for a 1U dual proc system with 16 gigs, so
> > I am hoping I have the wrong end of the stick...
> >
> > I read the available documentation, I can't seem to find clear sizing
> > information. Any help is appreciated.
>
> Currently the cluster keeps _all_ data in RAM.
> We are however working on storing data on disk aswell.
> Hopefully there will be something ready this fall/winter.
>
> /Jonas
>
> >
> > On Tue, 2004-07-13 at 08:05, "Thomas Böhme" wrote:
> >
> >>Hello,
> >>
> >>I currently have a MySQL DB running with about 2 billion records in
> >>different MyISAM tables. These tables use a disk space of 157 GB data.
> >>
> >>As I understood the concept of MySQL Cluster, it keeps all information in
> >>memory. To use it for my database, this would mean that I need a lot of
> >>machines which have together more than 157 GB RAM, right?
> >>
> >>
> >>Is there a chance for me to get a cluster running with just a few nodes?
> >>
> >>
> >>Regards
> >>Thomas Böhme
--
Richard F. Rebel
rrebel@stripped
t. 212.239.0000
Attachment: [application/pgp-signature] This is a digitally signed message part signature.asc
Attachment: [application/pgp-signature] This is a digitally signed message part signature.asc
