[Linux-cluster] Active Active Cluster

[Cleber Rodrigues]

Folks,

For the sole purpose of providing info: 

We had a very specific customer demand for high availability of a Web
application, plus MySQL service and data. The machines holding theses
services would be out in the field, with no access whatsoever to shared
storage.

We implemented a two node Red Hat Cluster configuration to allow for Web
Application HA, and droped in a IP resource for the MySQL service. The
MySQL service itself is always on, on both hosts, configured with
master<->master replication.

This has been in production use for something like 20 sites, for over
two years.

CR.

On Thu, 2010-02-04 at 10:56 -0500, Jeff Sturm wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: linux-cluster-bounces at redhat.com [mailto:linux-cluster-bounces at redhat.com]
> > On Behalf Of Gordan Bobic
> > Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 4:31 AM
> > To: linux clustering
> > Subject: Re: [Linux-cluster] Active Active Cluster
> > 
> > 3) MySQL Cluster
> > Pros: Faster than 2)
> > Cons: While it's running all data has to be in RAM, which limits the
> > size of the databases. Still slower than 1).
> 
> MySQL Cluster supports disk data tables these days, which have their own caveats but can grow larger than available RAM.  Indexes must still fit entirely in RAM.
> 
> Plan on a lot of testing if anyone tries it--you can get good results if you have control over the queries and schemas, but a naïve port from, say, InnoDB to NDB can be disastrous.  MySQL Cluster is complex and has nothing to do with Red Hat Cluster (which is why I'll stop here--subscribe to cluster at lists.mysql.com for more info).
> 
> -Jeff
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Linux-cluster mailing list
> Linux-cluster at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster

-- 
Cleber Rodrigues <crosa at redhat.com>
Solutions Architect - Red Hat, Inc.
Mobile: +55 61 9185.3454