From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1G92HT-0001kD-6E for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 04 Aug 2006 16:12:11 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with SMTP id k74GAZmU031599; Fri, 4 Aug 2006 16:10:35 GMT Received: from egr.msu.edu (jeeves.egr.msu.edu [35.9.37.127]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k74G8ap7030089 for ; Fri, 4 Aug 2006 16:08:37 GMT Received: from [35.9.129.93] (torx [35.9.129.93]) (authenticated bits=0) by egr.msu.edu (8.13.7/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k74G8WQ5010778 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 4 Aug 2006 12:08:36 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <44D370FD.5010306@gentoo.org> Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2006 12:08:29 -0400 From: Alec Warner Organization: Gentoo User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.8 (X11/20060424) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for August References: <20060801093001.C97C864465@smtp.gentoo.org> <44D1BFFD.4040303@gentoo.org> <1154607828.23292.5.camel@localhost> <44D1F4EF.3000209@gentoo.org> <1154612153.17538.26.camel@onyx> <44D30BE8.8060909@gentoo.org> <44D34753.6090604@gentoo.org> <44D36D6E.3060705@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <44D36D6E.3060705@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 0ce30224-2e25-4955-8015-eab803fc28e3 X-Archives-Hash: 2d1196fd05845b0416e2e45965c6ae23 > > Here's the question, gnome's bugzilla has over twice as many bugs as > we have, is quite speedy and doesn't seem to suffer from the OOM > killers that our bugzilla has. So what's the difference? Did gnome > just toss hardware at the problem to make it go away or have they done > something to make bugzilla work for them? > > I think throwing hardware at the problem is the wrong approach in this > case, as its just delaying the problem that has made the new hardware > seem like the solution...which will no doubt creep up again. > Because it's not just "more hardware" it's "search queries execute on read-only slaves and write queries execute on the master" which is a design change from how things are done now. If you give bugs a massive search query it can lock a bunch of tables in the current system, which means all those people who are trying to commit stuff to bugs will probably sit waiting for the massive search query to finish ;) Now multiply by a few times since tons of people use our bugzilla and you can imagine this happening quite often. In the new system the massive search query will run on the slave system, and it won't affect people making changes; hoewever there may be soem delay between data replication from the master to the slave(s), but that would be implementation dependent (depends on what you use to replicate). -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list