Re: MySQL [was: Re: Dr. Miguel 'Optimistic Locking' Arroz [was Re: WebObjects stress Testing tool?]]
Re: MySQL [was: Re: Dr. Miguel 'Optimistic Locking' Arroz [was Re: WebObjects stress Testing tool?]]
- Subject: Re: MySQL [was: Re: Dr. Miguel 'Optimistic Locking' Arroz [was Re: WebObjects stress Testing tool?]]
- From: Miguel Arroz <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2009 02:09:04 +0000
Hey!
On 2009/12/05, at 01:46, Mike Schrag wrote:
And I'm not talking about asynchronous replication, I'm talking
about real multi-master cluster with guaranteed integrity.
That's what I'm referring ... I have not used it, only read about it
enough to be intrigued by it. It requires your entire database to be
loaded into memory, but memory is pretty damn cheap. If you have a
truly HUGE database, this is not an option, but most of ours are not
larger than the reasonable max amount of memory.
Err... unless you have a monster machine with hundreds of GBs, why
would you want to cluster a small DB? I don't see any scenario where I
need to load balance a DB with half a dozen of GBs.
If that's the MySQL way, I would say the PgSQL is probably best! ;)
Yours
Miguel Arroz
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden