Note: "permalinks" may not be as permanent as we would like,
direct links of old sources may well be a few messages off.
I'm aware of MySQL's replication... though I've had some problems in the past with replication breaking under various circumstances, and I don't fully trust it. Should I take "I'd not bother" to mean that what I'm asking is not feasible, not reliable, or that it has not been tried? Thanks, Josh > -----Original Message----- > From: Lars Marowsky-Bree [mailto:lmb at suse.de] > Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2004 1:03 AM > To: Josh McAllister; drbd-user > Subject: Re: [DRBD-user] read-only access on Secondary for MySQL (InnoDB) > Raw Partition? > > On 2004-06-21T12:12:02, > Josh McAllister <josh at bluehornet.com> said: > > > I understand why we can't do read only access of ext2/3 partitions as we > > need the file system to recognize that the underlying device is changing > > even though it's read-only. I'm wondering though if anyone has tried > > accessing a drbd device from MySQL as an InnoDB raw partition (for > > read-only of course)? If this can be accomplished it would be a great > > way to do some load balancing using the secondary machine for selects > > and the primary for all write operations. > > > > Thoughts? > > I'd not bother, as MySQL can do read-only slaves internally and > consistently in a supported fashion. > > > Sincerely, > Lars Marowsky-Brée <lmb at suse.de> > > -- > High Availability & Clustering \ ever tried. ever failed. no > matter. > SUSE Labs | try again. fail again. fail better. > Research & Development, SUSE LINUX AG \ -- Samuel Beckett