5 messages in com.mysql.lists.clusterRE: MySQL Cluster Question
FromSent OnAttachments
Patrick07 Jan 2005 11:15 
Casto, Robert07 Jan 2005 11:23 
Martin Skold08 Jan 2005 00:11 
Casto, Robert08 Jan 2005 11:14 
Patrick08 Jan 2005 11:36 
Subject:RE: MySQL Cluster Question
From:Casto, Robert (rca@amazon.com)
Date:01/07/2005 11:23:21 AM
List:com.mysql.lists.cluster

Patrick,

The issue right now is that 4.1.8 only uses memory to manage database tables
with checks going to disk. There is a note somewhere that the plan is to have
disk based tables by version 4.1.10. If you use 4 machines, you could have 2
versions of the database with each database split between two machines. That
would mean that each machine would have to handle 2.5 Gig all in memory and you
will probably want to add more for indexes.

The cluster is good now for smaller databases, but my hope is that support for
disk-based tables will come soon and I can put my larger databases on the
cluster.

Good luck!

Robert Casto Quality Measurements 206.266.3695

-----Original Message----- From: Patrick [mailto:nawt@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, January 07, 2005 11:16 AM To: clus@lists.mysql.com Subject: MySQL Cluster Question

Hi,

I'm a bit conufsed as to where MySQL cluster would be of good use ?

I'm about to get two machines with 4gb of ram that are going to be nfs servers for my future mail system and then another 3 machines with 2gb of ram as my mail nodes, the mail system data will be stored in mysql if mysql cluster would work,

I was thinking i could make a mysql node on each of the mail delivery nodes ( app nodes ) and then the storage nodes on the two larger boxes, the database shouldn't ever be more than about 5GB although it might be smaller or larger, i'm not really wanting to use mysql cluster for performance but rather for high availability.

------ In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let there be Light.' And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better.