38 messages in com.mysql.lists.clusterRe: Is MySQL Cluster stable and matur...
FromSent OnAttachments
Konstantin Rozinov24 Jul 2008 00:01 
Krishna Chandra Prajapati24 Jul 2008 00:19 
Mark Callaghan24 Jul 2008 00:31 
Serge Kozlov24 Jul 2008 03:46 
Josh Miller24 Jul 2008 07:15 
Konstantin Rozinov24 Jul 2008 12:49 
Konstantin Rozinov24 Jul 2008 13:00 
Konstantin Rozinov24 Jul 2008 13:04 
Josh Miller25 Jul 2008 07:58 
Ben Wiechman25 Jul 2008 08:43 
Serge Kozlov25 Jul 2008 09:44 
Pascal Charest25 Jul 2008 12:48 
Konstantin Rozinov25 Jul 2008 17:40 
Konstantin Rozinov25 Jul 2008 17:54 
Konstantin Rozinov25 Jul 2008 17:56 
Mark Callaghan25 Jul 2008 22:58 
Serge Kozlov25 Jul 2008 23:19 
Massimo26 Jul 2008 00:26 
Mark Callaghan26 Jul 2008 07:38 
Jeff Sturm26 Jul 2008 20:49 
Andrew Garner26 Jul 2008 22:51 
Mark Callaghan27 Jul 2008 06:23 
Jeff Sturm27 Jul 2008 12:14 
Jeff Sturm27 Jul 2008 12:49 
Serge Fonville28 Jul 2008 01:04 
Konstantin Rozinov28 Jul 2008 23:53 
living liquid | Christian Meisinger29 Jul 2008 00:07 
Konstantin Rozinov29 Jul 2008 00:28 
living liquid | Christian Meisinger29 Jul 2008 00:56 
Massimo29 Jul 2008 05:19 
Matthew Montgomery29 Jul 2008 05:51 
Hartmut Holzgraefe29 Jul 2008 05:54 
Mikael Ronström29 Jul 2008 06:56 
Mikael Ronström29 Jul 2008 07:07 
Serge Fonville29 Jul 2008 07:29 
Mikael Ronström29 Jul 2008 08:04 
Burhan Khalid29 Jul 2008 14:37 
Konstantin Rozinov29 Jul 2008 17:28 
Subject:Re: Is MySQL Cluster stable and mature enough to run a social network?
From:Josh Miller (jos@itsecureadmin.com)
Date:07/24/2008 07:15:19 AM
List:com.mysql.lists.cluster

Konstantin Rozinov wrote:

I am in the design phase of a new project and am trying to determine if MySQL Cluster is a viable option for the project I'm working on. It's a social network with many of the typical social network site features (profiles, photos, comments, videos, etc). We are using LAMP environment. I'm trying to research MySQL Cluster, MySQL Replication, and how other large sites cope with large amounts of traffic and how they solve their scalability and HA issues.

It seems everyone is recommending replication, but I have concerns about it:

1. Initially, we expect that there will be as many writes as reads as more and more users create profiles, post photos, comments, etc. Considering that replication is great for read-intensive applications, would replication be of any help here? How would I aleviate the large number of writes to a single master server?

3. Even if I partition my data across different master databases, if one of them fails then part of the site (and potentially the entire site) might go offline. Or am I wrong? Any thoughts on this scenario would be greatly appreciated.

Hi Konstantin,

When considering a site or service such as this, I like to consider how best to create the impression of "infinitely scalable". There is really no such thing, but if there were, how would it apply to this type of scenario?

You might only plan on growing to 800GB in the first 12 months, but what about the next 12 months? What if you grow to 5000GB in the first 18 months? It's incredibly difficult to scale that way if you don't consider that a possibility in the first place.

The only way that I have seen huge data well managed is to partition the data -- create a mechanism to do that now so that you don't have to redesign later when you're overwhelmed with performance issues related to a single dataset design. When you partition the data, you can then use best practices for providing highly available database service.