On Apr 10, 3:38 am, Merric Mercer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> James,
>
> The issue with Cluster is that it is designed to work synchronously.
> This is fine when the all the DB is on a fast, local network but not
> when the DB needs to be replicated to geographically different networks,
> where
On 4/9/07, Merric Mercer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The issue with Cluster is that it is designed to work synchronously.
> This is fine when the all the DB is on a fast, local network but not
> when the DB needs to be replicated to geographically different networks,
> where latency becomes a maj
James,
The issue with Cluster is that it is designed to work synchronously.
This is fine when the all the DB is on a fast, local network but not
when the DB needs to be replicated to geographically different networks,
where latency becomes a major issue.
Django already cares and knows about
Hummm... looks like I own you an apology, Merric. I was wrong about
how to access the replicated data on the slave hosts. I was either
thinking about clusters or I was flat out wrong.
But what James said, and kemuri, approachs my mistake. I hope it helps you :)
On 4/9/07, Merric Mercer <[EMA
On 4/9/07, Merric Mercer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The official documentation on MySQL 5.1 "Using Replication for
> ScaleOut" is explicit and states that it is the application (Django)
> that needs to send the writes to the Master and the Reads to the
> Slaves.Unless I'm wrong this would r
The official documentation on MySQL 5.1 "Using Replication for
ScaleOut" is explicit and states that it is the application (Django)
that needs to send the writes to the Master and the Reads to the
Slaves.Unless I'm wrong this would rule out using replication with
Django.
The quote from
Julio,
In this scenario am I right in thinking that in MySQL the Master
automatically acts as a load balancer and that I therefore don't need
any other software
to automatically delegate reads between slaves and MySQL knows to send
all writes to the Master?
I'm slightly confused, I've been
Thank Kemuri,
MySQL cluster seems very cool, but I'm not sure it is the best solution
if the DB is split over different networks . Latency might be an issue
with the synchronous setup that MySQL cluster provides.
Having looked at it a bit further since my post I am considering
"circular repli
hey Merric,
On Apr 9, 4:10 am, Merric Mercer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The django book's chapter on deployment mentions the use of Database
> replication as a means to scale using MySQL.
>
If you want to try something cool, try MySQL Cluster, and better 5.1
since it has disk-based support in
Yes, there's a way, but it's not in Django that you do this, but on
the database. You don't need to configured Django (or any application
accessing the database) to "talk" to slave hosts. It's the job of the
database server software to abstract this step for you.
You're going to setup slaves
On 4/8/07, Merric Mercer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> However, I can't figure out how Django handles it. I can't see anything
> in the documentation or the settings that would allow writes to be
> handled by a different host to the reads.
The idea with both load balancing and DB replication is t
11 matches
Mail list logo
