O'Reilly Radar > Web 2.0 and Databases Part 1: Second Life
Popularity Report
 |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
Rank
URL Tag Cloud
Bookmark History
Saved by 12 people (-1 private), first by anonymouse user on 2006-08-03
- Chericem on 2008-03-26 - Tags databases , interviewing , web2.0
- Shunza on 2008-03-21 - Tags analysis , database , design , mysql , secondlife , study
- Genericbrandx on 2007-08-09 - Tags General
- Joel on 2007-07-29 - Tags mysql , scalability
- Pickerel on 2007-07-27 - Tags web20 , database
Public Sticky notes
Highlighted by joel
From my end, the worst MySQL moment was when, in the midst of a colo move we decided that we could bring the system back up before we had moved our slave database. After all, what are the odds of the primary going down in the 2 hours it would take to schlep the slave over and bring it up? Apparently the odds were 100%.
Highlighted by joel
Like everybody else, we started with One Database All Hail The Central Database, and have subsequently been forced into clustering. However, we've eschewed any of the general purpose cluster technologies (mysql cluster, various replication schemes) in favor of explicit data partitioning. So, we still have a central db that keeps track of where to find what data (per-user, for instance), and N additional dbs that do the heavy lifting. Our feeling is that this is ultimately far more scalable than black-box clustering. Right now we're still in the transition process, so we remain vulnerable to overload. As Cory mentioned, we're moving to an HTTP-based internal communication model in order to improve our flexibility.
Highlighted by joel
Public Comment
on 2006-08-04 by mattmcalister
on 2006-10-25 by jkatzman