List:Replication« Previous MessageNext Message »
From:Marcus Bointon Date:September 8 2008 7:20pm
Subject:Re: mysql Replication is too slow
View as plain text  
On 8 Sep 2008, at 18:33, Rick James wrote:

> * Slave hardware should be at least as powerful as master.

I find this really isn't a problem. I run a slave with much less CPU  
and disk, and it has no trouble keeping up because it's not having to  
do all the other things that the master does. It does lag when I post  
big transactions, but that's mainly due to a lack of speed on the  
master, not the slave.

> * When there are long-running queries Seconds_Behind_Master lies,  
> but you say it is consistently > 300 sec?

It certainly shouldn't be consistently behind whatever you do. The  
only way I can think of that happening is if you often run  
transactions that take about 10 minutes to run, in which case you will  
often be in that state, as transactions do not get replicated until  
they commit (so the slaves never have to do rollbacks).

Marcus Bointon
Synchromedia Limited: Creators of
UK resellers of info@hand CRM solutions
marcus@stripped |

mysql Replication is too slowTimo8 Sep
  • RE: mysql Replication is too slowRick James8 Sep
    • Re: mysql Replication is too slowMarcus Bointon8 Sep
      • RE: mysql Replication is too slowRick James8 Sep
        • ConsultingDatabase System17 Sep
          • RE: ConsultingRick James17 Sep
            • RE: ConsultingDatabase System17 Sep
              • Re: ConsultingMarcus Bointon17 Sep