Hi Reuven,
Michael is warning you against using SMB or NFS for your data
directory, in case you were thinking of doing so. I know you didn't
mention that but I think he was trying to be helpful just in case you
got the idea to use one of these technologies.
Baron
2008/4/1 Reuven Nisser <[EMAIL
Hi Michael,
I do not understand, please explain.
The plan is to use "One file per table", move the database directory to
a separate disk and establish a link to the directory from the previous
location. What locking problem do you see in Unix or Windows?
Thanks, Reuven
Michael Dykman wrote:
I
2008/4/1 Reuven Nisser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi Rob,
>
> Thank you for the answer.
>
> Yes, the two databases do not interact but I access them using ODBC
> connection and if I use two instances, I will need two ODBC connections
> setup on each production PC. If I use one instance I could use fo
Hi Rob,
Thank you for the answer.
Yes, the two databases do not interact but I access them using ODBC
connection and if I use two instances, I will need two ODBC connections
setup on each production PC. If I use one instance I could use for the
second connection:
;ODBC=XXX;Database=yyy
So,
I would not recommend using either SMB or NFS to access data
directories , especially if you expectingany kind of load. File locks
simply do do work effectively (or at all) across such mounts.
- michael dykman
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 12:05 PM, Rob Wultsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Option 1:
>
Option 1:
Assuming you do not need the databases to interact with each other I
would setup two instances of mysql with separate datadirectories. This
should make your back process easier. Read:
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/option-files.html
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/windows-c
