List:General Discussion« Previous MessageNext Message »
From:Johan De Meersman Date:September 2 2010 2:32pm
Subject:Re: Replication VS Cluster
View as plain text  
On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 1:10 PM, Jangita <jangita@stripped> wrote:

> Hi Guys,
> We have a system that has been running along nicely for the past three
> months on a pc (4gb 1,8ghz,debian lenny pc). It is a telecom-financal
> system; slightly 2 hits per minute but growing exponentally as customers
> increase.

Growth should be linear to the growth of customers, no ? :-)

> We have now bought two servers 12Gb RAM RAID blah blah;

RAID setup is important :-) Datafiles preferably on raid 10.

> and we want to set the servers up such that one is an exact duplicate of
> the other; to guard against hardware failiure (in case for example one
> motherboard is fried for some reason). We want to be able to switch from one
> server to the next and continue with minimum downtime. Switching will be
> manual until I figure out how to do an automatic switch (probably
> continuously ping the main server from the hot backup and if the ping fails
> the hot backup can change its ip automatically or something!)

Have a look at Ultramonkey for that.

> Anyway, what method of keeping the two servers in sync would the experts
> recommend between replication and setting up a cluster (or something else)?
> which will also give me a painless (and later maybe automatic) changeover?
> Both servers are connected to the same switch.

Standard setup would be replication, yes. If you setup automatic failover,
make sure you prevent automatic failback - that's the best way to mess up
your dataset.

I also hear MMM is pretty good, although I have no personal experience with

Another route you might want to investigate, is Xen (or VMWare, if so
inclined). Build a single virtual host on your hardware, allocate everything
and the kitchen sink to it, and run your MySQL in it. You'll have a slight
performance loss, obviously, but here's the benefit: you can set up the
second server so that it keeps a bit-perfect copy of your primary machine.
The moment your primary machine dies, the second takes over; and since it
has the EXACT same state down to the last bit of ram, you don't even lose a

Under Xen this feature is called Remus I believe, VMWare calls it Live
Migration or something similar.

> --
> Jangita | +256 76 91 8383 | Y! & MSN: jangita@stripped
> Skype: jangita | GTalk: jangita.nyagudi@stripped
> --
> MySQL General Mailing List
> For list archives:
> To unsubscribe:

Bier met grenadyn
Is als mosterd by den wyn
Sy die't drinkt, is eene kwezel
Hy die't drinkt, is ras een ezel

Replication VS ClusterJangita2 Sep
  • Re: Replication VS ClusterJohan De Meersman2 Sep
    • Re: Replication VS ClusterJangita2 Sep
  • Re: Replication VS Clustera.smith2 Sep
    • Re: Replication VS ClusterJangita2 Sep
      • RE: Replication VS ClusterNeil Aggarwal2 Sep
        • Re: Replication VS ClusterJohan De Meersman2 Sep
        • Re: Replication VS ClusterJohan De Meersman2 Sep
      • Re: Replication VS Clustera.smith2 Sep
        • Re: Replication VS ClusterJohan De Meersman2 Sep