Replacing apache with nginx

mike mike503 at
Wed Oct 1 19:55:26 MSD 2008

On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 5:00 AM, Gena Makhomed <gmm at> wrote:

> Mysql Cluster has no "Single Point of Failure".
> complex may be only setup of cluster, not usage.
> "memcached solution" is the best choice if memcached
> located on fronted server and frontend is not redundant -
> there is no additional "Single Points of Failure", in this
> case if frontend server is down - the whole site is down too.

we're going in circles here. central session management can be done
and scaled appropriately, just like -any- other database-centric
workload, and a two-phase memcached can be done probably a few ways as
well, including syncing the data in batches instead of per request,

mysql cluster still seems to be a bit complex to administer, i think
it can fail and is hard to recover right now (it is designed to be
redundant, but i think it can still break) and some apps may need to
change how they use the database to get proper performance and such
out of it. not to mention depending on the version in use, you need a
ton of RAM. it's not a 100% drop-in for standard mysql engines.

More information about the nginx mailing list