List:Falcon Storage Engine« Previous MessageNext Message »
From:James Day Date:November 5 2008 1:36am
Subject:Re: Network vs. Disk
View as plain text  
Jim,

> Cheap servers (quad core Intel) can send 39,.000 messages through a 
> switch per second without breaking a sweat ...
> What does this suggest about the future of database systems built around 
> disks?

Combining what you're doing with solid state storage might get a really nice 
solution for cases where scale up is the only viable solution, or where 
redesigning the architecture isn't viable.

I've seen a single server at a major media company pass so many network 
packets to clients that they swamp the packet rate that the network switches 
can route. I've also seen memcached use swamp network switches at a very 
well known site to the point that data had to be moved from memcached to 
clients to avoid overloading the network.

You might want to have a word with the Dolphin Interconnect people sometime, 
if you haven't already:

http://solutions.mysql.com/solutions/partner.php?partner=1112

They do good things for MySQL Cluster performance, via reduced network latency.

James Day, MySQL Senior Support Engineer.
Thread
Network vs. DiskJim Starkey4 Nov
  • Re: Network vs. DiskBrian Aker5 Nov
  • Re: Network vs. DiskJames Day5 Nov
Re: Network vs. DiskJim Starkey5 Nov