MySQL cluster vs memcached

[Prateek Mathur]

You would want to evaluate Mysql cluster properly before you use it.It has
high resource utilization especially memory and it keeps ur network busy by
just doing the replication.
I haven't heard much sucess with the mysql cluster as yet and it still is a
work in progress before it gains high use.
The livejournal pdf document mentioned above is a nice place to start for
such things.
http://danga.com/words/2005_oscon/oscon-2005.pdf


On 10/13/06, Serhat Sakarya <serhat at sakarya.nl> wrote:
>
> On 10/13/06, Kevin Burton <burton at tailrank.com> wrote:
> >
> > We really suffer from MySQL replication scalability issues.  Basically
> > you can scale reads but not writes.......
> >
> > I'm thinking of migrating some portions of our app to MySQL cluster
> > because basically it's an all memory DB and (in theory) should scale
> > linearly if we need to index more data.
>
>
> It's not going scale linearly in practice exactly because you're going to
> have writes and communication overhead between the nodes. With a memcached
> backend, you'll get much closer to actual linear scalability because there
> is no internal communication necessary.
>
> I would be looking more for the advantage of failover/reliability in
> clustering the DB backend and use memcached for the actual scalability.
>
> Regards,
>
> Serhat
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.danga.com/pipermail/memcached/attachments/20061013/b18dd006/attachment.htm