|
|||||||||||
|
Re: Cluster performance with data node down
From: Giulio Ferro <auryn(at)zirakzigil.org>
Date: Wed Aug 15 2007 - 14:02:36 EDT
First of all thanks for the answer. Secondly I must admit that what you say doesn't sound very convincing to me. What we are talking about here is a query which on a single machine configuration (no cluster) takes less than .3 sec. to complete.
So we have
*) single machine - no cluster : < 0.3 seconds *) cluster - 2/2 data nodes : < 0.4 seconds *) cluster - 1/2 data nodes : > 12 seconds. What we have here is a configuration without any workload (except the query I execute). As far as I can tell there is no task here which can benefit from parallelization. But even if it were, parallelization could in no way account for a difference in execution of a factor of 30 (12 / 0.4) As a software architect my guess is that here we have something of an anomaly in the way things are managed in a degraded cluster. I could also add data nodes, but unless some of you explains to me how this could really set things right I'm still thinking we are barking at the wrong tree... -- MySQL Cluster Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/cluster To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/cluster?unsub=lists@pantek.comReceived on Wed Aug 15 14:02:52 2007 This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Oct 07 2007 - 10:14:59 EDT |
||||||||||
|
|||||||||||