On Wednesday 21 February 2001 12:10, Hroi Sigurdsson wrote:
>On Wed, Feb 21, 2001 at 11:45:30AM -0700, Sasha Pachev wrote:
>
>> Let's say somebody manages to hack one of the slaves, which is very much
more
>> likely than being able to hack the master directly (you have 100 of them,
>> after all) and convince it to proxy a funny update. This will affect the
>> whole system.
>
>Just to follow up: We are *not* doing this as a security measure. It is
>only for compatibility with old clients and *convenience*. We want to provide
>to customers a hostname, username and password they can use to configure
>their box -- not a long list of slaves and masters. Doing it this way we
>don't need to ask them to install our custom mysql client library and
>configuration.
>We want our database cluster to be accesible as if it was one big, black
>box. One IP, one port and then have an LVS machine taking care of balancing
>connections among slaves.
Ok. The proxy feature should not be very hard to do, actually, and it will
not affect the stability of 3.23, so if Monty is not opposed, I'll code it up
shortly. Monty does want new code to go to 4.0 as a rule, but sometimes you
can talk him into putting it in 3.23. So let's see what he says... If he said
yes now, I could probably have it ready before 3.23.34 is out.
I am thinking of the following options in my.cnf:
proxy-host
proxy-user
proxy-password
read-proxy-host
read-proxy-user
read-proxy-password
write-proxy-host
write-proxy-user
write-proxy-host
if proxy is set, proxy both read and writes, if read-proxy is set, proxy
reads, if write-proxy set proxy writes.
--
MySQL Development Team
__ ___ ___ ____ __
/ |/ /_ __/ __/ __ \/ / Sasha Pachev <sasha@stripped>
/ /|_/ / // /\ \/ /_/ / /__ MySQL AB, http://www.mysql.com/
/_/ /_/\_, /___/\___\_\___/ Provo, Utah, USA
<___/
