cloudstack-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chiradeep Vittal <Chiradeep.Vit...@citrix.com>
Subject Re: CS 4 Database integrity - mysql server performances
Date Thu, 14 Feb 2013 19:43:52 GMT
+Alex since he is opinionated on this stuff.

In general CloudStack uses transactions and the framework ensures that
cleanup happens if exceptions (expected or otherwise) are thrown. For
long-running operations where locks are desired on a particular row,
CloudStack does not use native row locking but uses a custom locking
scheme. See here:
http://support.citrix.com/article/CTX132018



On 2/14/13 10:46 AM, "benoit lair" <kurushi4000@gmail.com> wrote:

>However, i already reached the max by default (100) which is not pretty
>enormous.
>
>And i've seen in the manuals downloaded from cloudstack.org that the mysql
>server should be configured with a max connections depending of differents
>elements such as nodes, vms, networks (i don't remember which elemnt
>exactly, but sure that there is a dependency of the configuration of mysql
>according to the size of the deployment.
>
>So i need to cover the disaster scenarios in order to be sure to apply the
>good disaster recovery procedures. Also i need to to be sure not to loss
>datas acording to differents scenarios. The mysql server being the brain
>of the cloud you build, it must absolutely keeping fully stable.
>
>Here are the reasons why i need to know if the code protect (transactions,
>exception managing loss of connection or crash or querie out of the mysql
>query cache) againt mysql failures.
>
>Si if there is still a doubt, so okay no problem, i will deploy a
>redundant
>solution and will consolidate my installation with per example a very big
>cluster (lot of ram with an expensive configuration) under xcp covering
>the
>crash.
>
>Regards, Benoit.
>
>2013/2/14 Nik Martin <nik.martin@openfra.me>
>
>> I'm pretty sure the amount of connections to the DB is very low, even
>>for a
>> large scale CS deployment.
>>
>> Nik Martin
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 11:44 AM, benoit lair <kurushi4000@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Per example, if i reach the max connections, does it will compromise
>>the
>> db
>> > and so cs mgmt server ?
>> >
>> > 2013/2/14 benoit lair <kurushi4000@gmail.com>
>> >
>> > > Okay guys,
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > MariaDB would be an intersting alternative, but concerning the
>>failures
>> > > managements ? Cs code does protect the db integrity against mysql's
>> > (oracle
>> > > or mariadb one) failures ? Does cs manages transaction so anyway
>>mysql
>> > > crashes, i can go sleep  quietly, cs won't have a corrupted
>>database (a
>> > > missing record, or a insert not terminated belong 2  tables, so
>>there
>> > will
>> > > missing a record so it will generating bugs (unrecoverable i mean)
>>of
>> the
>> > > platform.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Regards, Benoit
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > 2013/2/14 Alexey Zilber <alexeyzilber@gmail.com>
>> > >
>> > >> David,
>> > >>
>> > >> I have CS 3 running with MariaDB 5.2.  I'll have to test with CS 4
>>and
>> > the
>> > >> latest MariaDB though.  A lot of the Oracle enterprise features
>>are in
>> > the
>> > >> latest version.  Without the Oracle pricetag.  Personally I'd
>>rather
>> > >> support Monty then Ellison.  :)
>> > >>
>> > >> With CS 3, my management server is below minimum specs and still
>>does
>> a
>> > >> decent job.  It's subjective though.
>> > >>
>> > >> -Alex
>> > >> On Feb 14, 2013 11:10 PM, "David Nalley" <david@gnsa.us> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> > On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Alexey Zilber <
>> > alexeyzilber@gmail.com
>> > >> >
>> > >> > wrote:
>> > >> > > CS should really switch to and recommend MariaDB instead
of
>> straight
>> > >> > mysql.
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > You will find your hardware goes much farther with it.
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > -Alex
>> > >> >
>> > >> > While I am not personally a mysql fan, I'd love to hear your
>> > >> > experiences with MariaDB and CloudStack.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > --David
>> > >> >
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>>


Mime
View raw message