Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Data Storage Upgrades

MySQL Clustering Software Launched 48

lawrencekhoo writes "MySQL AB announced yesterday that software for building a MySQL Cluster will be available for download by the end of April. Articles available from Computerworld, Internetnews, Linux Electrons, and PHP Architect. Great! Now my website can finally have 99.99% availability ..."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

MySQL Clustering Software Launched

Comments Filter:
  • by dacarr ( 562277 ) on Wednesday April 14, 2004 @03:33PM (#8863008) Homepage Journal
    It's PR. Remember, The SCO Group is "a leading provider of UNIX-based solutions", per many of their press releases. It doesn't make it any more acceptable, it's just a tactic. Chill.
  • In memory only? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by diegomontoya ( 712934 ) on Wednesday April 14, 2004 @04:01PM (#8863247)
    If this is the requirement deployment then for people like us were db size at over 20GB, and yes the big blogs are already stored in compressed using compression, this would not be economically pratically to use. Factoring OS, caching, I need to get 22GB memory for each node? Last I checked, the 2GB cheaps are still nasty expensive.
  • by jonadab ( 583620 ) on Wednesday April 14, 2004 @08:37PM (#8865309) Homepage Journal
    I think they're using "database" here to mean RDBMS. Technically a database is
    just anything that organises data, so a filesystem would count, but that's not
    how the term is generally used. Usually these days when people say database
    they mean RDBMS.

    The other thing is, most installs is not the only reasonable measure of
    popularity. I'm pretty sure more people have daily interaction with MySQL
    than with Berkeley DB directly. Berkeley DB is installed so widely because
    it's been around longer and because certain key pieces of software depend
    on or use it for historical reasons, not because people like it better.

    Note that I'm not trying to say Berkeley DB is bad or anything, or that MySQL
    should replace it; they're really quite different things, and they exist for
    different purposes and fill different niches. I wouldn't consider them to be
    direct competition really -- well, not mostly. MySQL is in competition with
    PostgreSQL mainly, and to a lesser extent the major commercial database
    offerings (Oracle, MS SQL Server) and various lesser-known projects (e.g.
    Firebird SQL). Berkeley DB competes with I think certain Gnu libraries and
    maybe some other things I'm even less aware of. Not that MySQL and Berkeley
    DB are in _completely_ different worlds; they both might reasonably be said
    to compete on some level with SQLite for example, so there is some overlap
    between their areas of application. But still, they're mostly not really in
    the same category.

    Sure, they're both databases. But to say one is more popular than the other
    is like arguing whether traceroute is more popular than Mozilla. They are,
    after all, both internet software.
  • Node requirements (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 15, 2004 @02:22AM (#8866699)
    The standard requirements for the node surprised me.

    Is stats that you need 16GB of RAM !! Why do they say that? Doesn't the amount of RAM depends on the size of your Database? If my InnoDB database file is only 3GB why would I need more that 4GB og RAM?

    Also, why the hell would you need scsi drives for an in memory database?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 15, 2004 @06:50AM (#8867498)
    I mean, this is an enterprise-scale storage engine from the same engineering team that used to deride ACID transaction isolation and rollback as unimportant, and whose parser still silently ignores any attempt to use integrity constraints that aren't supported. Are these the right people to achieve the robustness that needs to accompany "five nines"?
  • by ldspartan ( 14035 ) on Thursday April 15, 2004 @12:39PM (#8870841) Homepage
    No, they're either morons or criminally ignorant of what is considered a standard feature set for RDBMSs. For all the reasons you mentioned and more.

    --
    lds

Our OS who art in CPU, UNIX be thy name. Thy programs run, thy syscalls done, In kernel as it is in user!

Working...