Whats the difference in using Cluster vs. using replication?
In a replication setup, a master MySQL server updates one or more slaves. Transactions are committed sequentially, and a slow transaction can cause the slave to lag behind the master. This means that if the master fails, it is possible that the slave might not have recorded the last few transactions. If a transaction-safe engine such as InnoDB is being used, then a transaction will either be complete on the slave or not applied at all, but replication does not guarantee that all data on the master and the slave will be consistent at all times. In MySQL Cluster, all storage nodes are kept in synch, and a transaction committed by any one storage node is committed for all storage nodes. In the event of a storage node failure, all remaining storage nodes will remain in a consistent state.In short, whereas MySQL replication is asynchronous, MySQL Cluster is synchronous.
In a replication setup, a master MySQL server updates one or more slaves. Transactions are committed sequentially, and a slow transaction can cause the slave to lag behind the master. This means that if the master fails, it is possible that the slave might not have recorded the last few transactions. If a transaction-safe engine such as InnoDB is being used, a transaction will either be complete on the slave or not applied at all, but replication does not guarantee that all data on the master and the slave will be consistent at all times. In MySQL Cluster, all data nodes are kept in synchrony, and a transaction committed by any one data node is committed for all data nodes. In the event of a data node failure, all remaining data nodes remain in a consistent state. In short, whereas standard MySQL replication is asynchronous, MySQL Cluster is synchronous. We have implemented (asynchronous) replication for Cluster in MySQL 5.1. This includes the capability to replicate both between two c
In a replication setup, a master MySQL server updates one or more slaves. Transactions are committed sequentially, and a slow transaction can cause the slave to lag behind the master. This means that if the master fails, it is possible that the slave might not have recorded the last few transactions. If a transaction-safe engine such as InnoDB is being used, a transaction will either be complete on the slave or not applied at all, but replication does not guarantee that all data on the master and the slave will be consistent at all times. In MySQL Cluster, all data nodes are kept in synchrony, and a transaction committed by any one data node is committed for all data nodes. In the event of a data node failure, all remaining data nodes remain in a consistent state. In short, whereas standard MySQL replication is asynchronous, MySQL Cluster is synchronous. We are planning to implement (asynchronous) replication for Cluster in MySQL 5.1. This will include the capability to replicate both
In a replication setup, a master MySQL server updates one or more slaves. Transactions are committed sequentially, and a slow transaction can cause the slave to lag behind the master. This means that if the master fails, it is possible that the slave might not have recorded the last few transactions. If a transaction-safe engine such as InnoDB is being used, then a transaction will either be complete on the slave or not applied at all, but replication does not guarantee that all data on the master and the slave will be consistent at all times. In MySQL Cluster, all data nodes are kept in synch, and a transaction committed by any one data node is committed for all data nodes. In the event of a data node failure, all remaining data nodes will remain in a consistent state. In short, whereas standard MySQL replication is asynchronous, MySQL Cluster is synchronous. In the future, we are planning to implement (asynchronous) replication for Cluster, including the capability to replicate both
