Is it possible to receive the following configuration with Maria DB/MySQL:
Two master nodes with synchronous replication (actually need one, second need for failover and could be asynchronous ),
N slaves nodes with asynchronous replication,
We want to use Amazon EC2 with autoscale.
What are the pitfalls?
Which better for this task: Mysql or MariaDB?
There is no "synchronous Multi-Master replication" in standard replication.
Sounds like you would benefit from MariaDB with Galera. With that, you not only get synchronous replication, but also automatic recovery from server failure.
Related
I want to do synchronous and asynchronous replication, synchronize for some databases, and asynchrony for others.
Asynchronous I am doing it through MariaDB, through the traditional system that has replication.
But I want to implement synchronous replication also with Mysql / MariaDB.
The problem is that I do not know if Mysql Cluster also does that work, or if it is not necessary to have Mysql installed only or MariaDb and only use Mysql Cluster for both.
Thank you.
Disclosure: I am working for the MySQL Cluster team - "MySQL Cluster" as in NDB Cluster.
MySQL NDB Cluster always uses synchronous replication between its nodes. You can still use asynchronous replication to other MySQL instances or MySQL Clusters.
AFAIK only MySQL offers NDB and as open source.
Due to the usual network limitations synchronous replication is better suited for high availability in the local data center. It gives you an always consistent view of your data, two or more active instances and makes programing against it much easier.
Asynchronous is more for replication between data centers or availability zones where you can live with temporary inconsistencies in the data and have your programming model set up accordingly.
"MySQL Cluster" has more than one meaning, so I will avoid it.
"Galera" is the underlying cluster technology in MariaDB, PXC, and (if you do the installation yourself), MySQL.
Galera provides essentially-synchronous among (typically) 3 nodes. Meanwhile, each node can have any number of asynchronous Slaves hanging off it.
Also, one Galera cluster can asynchronously replicate to another such cluster. This is sometimes done with a cluster in each of two datacenters.
Mixing sync and async at the database level is quite unusual, and seems strange. The general principle of Replication is that all servers will have exactly the same (barring delays) data. Please elaborate on what you want to do. Also, think out of the box when it comes to topologies.
I have two mariadb servers one is configured as master and the other as a replica of this master. I have created a database named params on master and it has a table with a couple of items in it.
How can I see this table and access or modify it using the mysql shell on the replica?
Is this even possible or I have miss understood the replication altogether?
Check that replication works
If you aren't seeing the database on the slave replica, it would be good to check that the output of SHOW SLAVE STATUS doesn't return any errors. A good resource for getting started with replication is the MariaDB KB article on the subject.
When you have confirmed that replication works, you can connect to the slave replica and you should see the database there.
How replication works in MariaDB
Replication in MariaDB will propagate all changes that happen on the master server to any slave servers that are replicating from it. This allows you to read the same data from multiple places without burdening the master server. It does not allow you to seamlessly share data across multiple servers (a Galera cluster offers some of this).
The downside of master-slave replication is that when you want to make a change, you have to make it on the master in order to keep the data consistent across all servers. The benefit of it is the higher availability of your data and increased throughput of read queries. The Replication Overview article has a more detailed description of what replication is and lists some use cases for it.
Already configured Master-Slave Replication among two different machines. Now the problem is that it only allows the Master to enter the data and Slave to view this. the changes which made in Slave is not reflected in master.
My question is that is it possible to create a full duplex replication among two MySQL servers. ie, If i change the data either in master or in Slave both will reflected in both the machines.
References:
MySQL Master-Slave Replication
Steps to configure Master-Slave Replication
Yes, but there are risks, because replications is asynchronous. That is, both servers could insert the same row, and then when they process the replication log from the other server, they get a conflict.
You can listen to more about this problem in this free webinar: The Hazards of Multi-writing in a Dual-Master Setup
You should consider using a cluster solution with synchronous replication, like Percona XtraDB Cluster.
I'm kind of lost there, I want to setup a common MASTER/SLAVE replication on a MariaDB database. I choose MASTER/SLAVE over MASTER/MASTER to avoid complexifying things. The SLAVE will be used only if the MASTER server is down.
I've setup MariaDB 10.0.x, but when I start reading on how to achieve this replication, they introduce Galera, which, if I understand correctly, replaces MariaDB.
What do you use to tell the SLAVE server to take the relay if the MASTER server is down ? Is it handled automatically via the Galera Cluster ?
If possible, I don't want my application to be aware of the slave server : I just want to configure it with the IP of MariaDB MASTER, and if it can't be reached, to use the SLAVE instead. (But I do not want to specify this fallback in the application level)
Thanks
What you are looking for can be achieved. I just completed a setup of MariaDB 10 using asynchronous replication (not Galera). To ensure maximum uptime I setup master / master replication and used mysql-mmm to monitor the setup. This tool will manage a virtual IP and point it at one of the two masters for writing purposes. This ensures consistent writes against a single master as to avoid corruption of the data. If one master fails the virtual IP will be mapped to the other master. This provides the high availability aspect. The instructions stated below were very clear and easy to follow.
http://mysql-mmm.org/mmm2:guide
Good luck!
mysql-cluster-expert-5.1 document mentioned that:
"MySQL Cluster tables in MySQL 5.1 are normally stored completely in memory rather than on disk (this is why we refer to MySQL cluster as an in-memory database)"
which means mysql cluster is a distributed memory database, so has anybody ever done a comparison of mysql cluster & redis on speed?
I don't think redis does anything remotely similar to MySQL cluster, so you can't compare them.
MySQL cluster is a high-availability, fuly durable SQL cluster with fully synchronous replication. Redis is not. As far as I understand, redis supports neither synchronous replication, nor SQL.
MySQL cluster means that when you can COMMIT TRANSACTION**, if you lose any cluster member permanently 1ms later, your data are still safe. MySQL cluster query nodes (which are the clients) automatically fail-over in a very short time (typically < 5 seconds).
Redis does absolutely none of this. It is a non-SQL based data store which has master-slave replication (failover? You'd better implement it yourself)
You may as well ask if a motorbike is faster than an ocean liner.
** I don't think redis supports transactions, so that notion is rubbish as well.