Re: slave to master
- Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2016 11:03:03 +0200 (CEST)
- From: Johan De Meersman <vegivamp@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: slave to master
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jason Mallory" <Jason.Mallory@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: RE: slave to master
> Master-master with load balancer would be best
That's a bit brief, isn't it? :-)
It's more than worth pointing out that your loadbalancer should not actually be loadbalancing the connections; master-master replication doesn't quite work the way you think it does in most scenarios.
You only want the loadbalancer for the automated failover; but it should never send requests to more than one master at any given time. Have it send everything to your primary master only; and when that host fails, have it send everything to the secondary master only, and never fail back automatically.
It's also worth noting that master-master is still not an officially supported replication topology. Regular master-slave also works fine with the above loadbalancer configuration; in that case you'll just treat the slave as the new primary after failover; and will manually reconfigure the broken master to be a slave (and adapt the loadbalancer config accordingly) as repair.
There does exist software that can do those reconfigurations by itself, MMM is one such example.
Unhappiness is discouraged and will be corrected with kitten pictures.
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql