Home |  MySQL Buzz |  FAQ |  Feeds |  Submit your blog feed |  Feedback |  Archive |  Aggregate feed RSS 2.0 English Deutsch Español Français Italiano 日本語 Русский Português 中文
Showing entries 1 to 15

Displaying posts with tag: cloud database (reset)

Why You Should Embrace Database Virtualization
+1 Vote Up -1Vote Down
This article addresses the benefits provided from database virtualization. Before we proceed however, it is important to explain that database virtualization does NOT mean simply running a DBMS inside a virtual machine.

Database Virtualization, More Than Running a DBMS in a Virtual MachineWhile running a DBMS in a VM can provide advantages (and disadvantages) it is NOT database virtualization. Typical databases fuse together the data (or I/O) with the processing (CPU utilization) to operate as a single unit. Simply running that single unit in a VM does not provide the benefits detailed below. That is not database virtualization that is merely server virtualization.
An Example of the Database Virtualization ProblemSay you have a database handling banking and I have $10MM in the bank (I wish). Now let’s assume that the bank is busy, so it


  [Read more...]
Why You Should Embrace Database Virtualization
+0 Vote Up -0Vote Down

This article addresses the benefits provided from database virtualization. Before we proceed however, it is important to explain that database virtualization does NOT mean simply running a DBMS inside a virtual machine. Database Virtualization, More Than Running a DBMS in a Virtual Machine While running a DBMS in a VM can provide advantages (and disadvantages) it is NOT database virtualization. Typical databases fuse together the data (or I/O) with the processing (CPU utilization) to operate as a single unit. Simply running that single unit in a VM does not provide the benefits detailed below. That is not database virtualization that is merely server virtualization.
An Example of the Database Virtualization Problem Say you have a database handling

  [Read more...]
SkySQL Raises Additional 2.5 Million Dollars From California Technology Ventures
+3 Vote Up -2Vote Down

Yesterday, it was announced that SkySQL has raised an additional 2.5 million dollars in Series A funding from California Technology Ventures.

This comes along with the news of the new CEO, Patrik Sallner, taking the CEO role at SkySQL on July 1st.

Here are some relevant snippets:

“SkySQL also announced today that CTV, a venture capital fund that makes direct investments in technology and life science companies globally, invested an additional $2.5 million as part of the company’s recent A round of funding. With this latest investment, SkySQL has collected EUR 6 million to fund further growth.”

“About California Technology Ventures, LLC
California Technology Ventures, LLC is a venture capital fund that makes direct investments in technology and life science companies. CTV has built a strong reputation for its entrepreneurial approach to investing and

  [Read more...]
SkySQL Raises $4 Million in Series A Round Funding
+2 Vote Up -1Vote Down

I am very pleased to say that earlier today, SkySQL announced it has raised $4 Million in Series A Round Funding.

Let me post the main part of the press release here:

SAN JOSE – April 18, 2012SkySQL, the first choice in affordable database solutions for the MySQL® and MariaDB® databases in the enterprise and the cloud, today announces that the company has raised $4 million in Series A funding from a number of investors, including OnCorps, an elite peer-based community of veteran technology investors and advisors committed to bringing better, cost-disruptive technologies into the mainstream. Also funding the round are European investors including Finnish Industry Investment Ltd., Spintop Ventures and Open Ocean Capital.

SkySQL will primarily use the investment to fund growth in its new product development, including adding

  [Read more...]
Walking on Cloud 9
+1 Vote Up -0Vote Down

As the saying goes, we at Severalnines have been walking on several clouds this year, 9 to be precise!


Today, we are proud to say that we are on walking on Cloud 9!


And in the spirit of celebration, we would like to announce our:



Top 9 Clouds of the Year 2011 for Severalnines



Cloud 1 – releasing ClusterControl™ - our first commercial product in April!


ClusterControl™ is our flagship product. It enables developers and database administrators to Deploy, Manage, Monitor and Scale their clustered database platforms, free from the complexity and learning curves








  [Read more...]
Lack of Business Visibility Cripples Traditional SQL DaaS, Drives NewSQL
+0 Vote Up -0Vote Down
More and more public cloud companies are moving to managed cloud services to improve their value-add (price premium) and the stickiness of their solution. However, the shift to a database as a service (DaaS) severely reduces the DBAs visibility into the business, thus limiting the ability to hand tune the database to the requirements of the application and the database. The solution is a cloud database that eliminates the hand-tuning of the database, thereby enabling the DBA to be equally effective even with limited visibility into the business and application needs. It is these unique needs, particularly for SQL databases, that is fueling the NewSQL movement.
DBAs traditionally have insight into the company, enabling them to hand tune the database in a collaborative basis with the development team, such as:
1. Performance Trade-offs/Tuning: The database is

  [Read more...]
MySQL Clusters on Amazon EC2 - verified AMIs
+1 Vote Up -0Vote Down
We regularly receive questions from our user community with regards to which AMIs to use when deploying database clusters on Amazon EC2.

As part of our ongoing development work on the Severalnines Configurator and ClusterControl, we have recently done some testing on deploying MySQL Cluster on EC2 using Severalnines on three different AMIs. We thought we should share the results of these tests, hence the reason for this week's blog!

If you would like to test such a deployment yourself, feel free to use the parameters and guidelines below to do so. You can also check out these new videos to see



  [Read more...]
Do you need an elastic database?
+0 Vote Up -0Vote Down
Not every company or application needs an elastic database. Some applications can get by just fine on a single database server, rendering database elasticity moot from their perspective. To make this determination, simply ask yourself:
1. Will I need more than a single database server?Look at your current load and your projected growth and ask yourself whether it will exceed the capacity of a single server. If it doesn’t now, nor will it in the future, then you don’t need an elastic database.
2. Will my load fluctuate sufficiently to warrant the investment in elasticity?If your database requirements won’t experience fluctuations in demand—e.g. daily, weekly, monthly, seasonal changes in the number of servers required—then elasticity isn’t important. For example, if you have a social networking application that requires 2 database nodes 24x7, but peaks at 10

  [Read more...]
Cloud Elasticity & Databases
+0 Vote Up -0Vote Down
The primary reasons people are moving to the public cloud are: (1) replace capital expenses with operating expenses (pay as you go); (2) use shared resources for processes like back-up, maintenance, networking (shared expenses); (3) use shared infrastructure that enables you to pay only for those resources you actually use, instead of consuming your maximum load resources at all times (pay-per-use). The first thing you’ll notice is that all 3 cloud benefits have their basis in finances or the cloud business model.
We will focus in on #3 above: Pay-Per-Use. The old school model was to build your compute infrastructure for the maximum load today, plus growth over the life-cycle of the equipment, plus some buffer so the systems don’t get overloaded from spikes in usage. The net result is that your average usage might run 10% of the potential for the infrastructure you mortgaged
  [Read more...]
ScaleDB: Shared-Disk / Shared-Nothing Hybrid
+0 Vote Up -0Vote Down
The primary database architectures—shared-disk and shared-nothing—each have their advantages. Shared-disk has functional advantages such as high-availability, elasticity, ease of set-up and maintenance, eliminates partitioning/sharding, eliminates master-slave, etc. The shared-nothing advantages are better performance and lower costs. What if you could offer a database that is a hybrid of the two; one that offers the advantages of both. This sounds too good to be true, but it is fact what ScaleDB has done.
The underlying architecture is shared-disk, but in many situations it can operate like shared-nothing. You see the problems with shared-disk arise from the messaging necessary to (a) ship data among nodes and storage; and (b) synchronize the nodes in the cluster. The trick is to move the messaging outside of the transaction so it
  [Read more...]
The CAP Theorem Event Horizon
+0 Vote Up -0Vote Down
The CAP Theorem has become a convenient excuse for throwing data consistency under the bus. It is automatically assumed that every distributed system falls prey to CAP and therefore must sacrifice one of the three objectives, with consistency being the consistent fall guy. This automatic assumption is simply false. I am not debating the validity of the CAP Theorem, but instead positing that the onset of CAP limitations—what I call the CAP event horizon—does not start as soon as you move to a second master database node. Certain approaches can, in fact, extend the CAP event horizon.
Physics tells us that different properties apply at different scales. For example, quantum physics displays properties that do not apply at larger scale. We see similar nuances in scaling databases. For example, if you are running a master slave database, using synchronous replication with a single
  [Read more...]
ScaleDB Cache Accelerator Server (CAS): A Game Changer for Clustered Databases
+0 Vote Up -0Vote Down
ScaleDB and Oracle RAC are both clustered databases that use a shared-disk architecture. As I have mentioned previously, they both actually share data via a shared cache, so it might be more appropriate to call them shared-cache databases.

Whether it is called shared-disk or shared-cache, these databases must orchestrate the sharing of a single set of data amongst multiple nodes. This introduces two challenges: the physical sharing of the data and the logical sharing of the data.

Physical Sharing:
Raw storage is meant to work on a 1:1 basis with a single server. In order to share that data amongst multiple servers, you need either a Network File System (NFS), which shares whole files, or a Cluster File System (CFS), which shares data blocks.






  [Read more...]
Database Architectures & Performance II
+3 Vote Up -0Vote Down
As described in the prior post, the shared-disk performance dilemma is simple:

1. If each node stores/processes data in memory, versus disk, it is much faster.
2. Each node must expose the most recent data to the other nodes, so those other nodes are not using old data.

In other words, #1 above says flush data to disk VERY INFREQUENTLY for better performance, while #2 says flush everything to disk IMMEDIATELY for data consistency.

Oracle recognized this dilemma when they built Oracle Parallel Server (OPS), the precursor to Oracle Real Application Cluster (RAC). In order to address the problem, Oracle developed Cache Fusion.

Cache fusion is a peer-based shared cache. Each node works with a certain set of data in its local cache, until








  [Read more...]
Database Architectures & Performance
+1 Vote Up -0Vote Down
For decades the debate between shared-disk and shared-nothing databases has raged. The shared-disk camp points to the laundry list of functional benefits such as improved data consistency, high-availability, scalability and elimination of partitioning/replication/promotion. The shared-nothing camp shoots back with superior performance and reduced costs. Both sides have a point.

First, let’s look at the performance issue. RAM (average access time of 200 nanoseconds) is considerably faster than disk (average access time of 12,000,000 nanoseconds). Let me put this 200:12,000,000 ratio into perspective. A task that takes a single minute in RAM would take 41 days in disk. So why do I bring this up?

Shared-Nothing: Since the shared-nothing database has sole ownership of its data—it doesn’t share the data with other nodes—it can operate in the



  [Read more...]
ScaleDB Introduces Clustered Database Based Upon Water Vapor
+1 Vote Up -0Vote Down
ScaleDB is proud to announce the introduction of a database that takes data storage to a new level, and a new altitude. ScaleDB’s patent pending “molecular-flipping technology” enables low energy molecular flipping that changes selected water molecules from H20 to HOH, representing positive and negative states that mimic the storage mechanism used on hard drive disks.

“Because we act at the molecular level, we achieve massive storage density with minimal energy consumption, which is critical in today’s data centers, where energy consumption is the primary cost,” said Mike Hogan, ScaleDB CEO. “A single thimble of water vapor provides the same storage capacity as a high-end SAN.”

The technology does have one small challenge: persistence. Clouds are not known for their persistence. ScaleDB relies on the Cumulus formation, since it is far



  [Read more...]
Showing entries 1 to 15

Planet MySQL © 1995, 2014, Oracle Corporation and/or its affiliates   Legal Policies | Your Privacy Rights | Terms of Use

Content reproduced on this site is the property of the respective copyright holders. It is not reviewed in advance by Oracle and does not necessarily represent the opinion of Oracle or any other party.