Re: Why facebook used mysql ?

On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 12:15 PM, Ron Mayer
<rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com>wrote:

> Lincoln Yeoh wrote:
> > What's more important to such companies is the ability to scale over
> > multiple machines.
>
> That question - how much work it is to administer thousands of database
> servers - seems to have been largely missing from this conversation.
>
> Apparently back in 2008, Facebook had 1800 MySQL servers with 2 DBAs.[1]
>
> I wonder how that compares with large-scale Postgres deployments.
>
>
From a technology standpoint, it doesn't need to be ostensibly different,
provided you use Postgres in a way similar to how facebook is using MySQL.
Well, at least now; 8.4's re-implementation of the free space map was
critical for "zero-administration" type deployments. If you can script basic
failover deployments (remember that 1/2 of those 1800 are just slave
machines), you don't abstract storage from the app, and you keep database
schema similar across nodes, you can really ramp up the number of deployed
servers per dba.

Robert Treat
play: http://www.xzilla.net
work: http://www.omniti.com/is/hiring