Editor’s Note: Because our bloggers have lots of useful tips, every now and then we update and bring forward a popular post from the past. Today’s post was originally published on November 26, 2019.

It’s not uncommon these days for us to use a high availability stack for MySQL consisting of Orchestrator, Consul and ProxySQL. You can read more details about this stack by reading Matthias Crauwels’ blog post How to Autoscale ProxySQL in the Cloud as well as Ivan Groenwold’s post on MySQL High Availability With ProxySQL, Consul and Orchestrator. The high-level concept is simply that Orchestrator will monitor the state of the MySQL replication topology and report changes to Consul which in turn can update ProxySQL hosts using …

This is the announcement blogpost and this is my overview taken from medium:

The one where MySQL 8.0 lands on Google Cloud SQL

Ada Doglace and Lily Grace (lilygrams). Photo by Anthony Ferrara.

There are many things that makes me happy. Puppies (see picture), food, wine and databases… (not particularly in that order). And things that makes me even happier such as a well designed schema and proper usage of ORM (Object Relational Mapping).

MySQL was the database I used to love to hate. It grew on me and the fact that long strides were made to make it more consistent and more modern kept me away from …

This is a follow-up post in the MySQL Master Replication Crash Safety series.  In the previous posts, we explored the consequences of reducing durability on masters (different data inconsistencies after an OS crash depending on replication type) and the performance boost associated with this configuration (benchmark results done on Google Cloud Platform / GCP).  The consequences are summarised in

This post is a sister post to MySQL Master Replication Crash Safety Part #5: making things faster without reducing durability.  There is no introduction or conclusion to this post, only landing sections: reading this post without its context is not not recommended. You should start with the main post and come back here for more details.

And this Part #5 of the series has many sub-parts.  So far,

This is a follow-up post in the MySQL Master Replication Crash Safety series.  In the three previous posts, we explored the consequence of reducing durability on masters (including setting sync_binlog to a value different from 1).  But so far, I only quickly presented why a DBA would run MySQL with such configuration.  In this post, I present actual benchmark results.  I also present a

This post is a sister post to MySQL Master Replication Crash Safety Part #4: benchmarks of high and low durability.  There are no introduction or conclusion to this post, only landing sections: reading this post without its context is not recommended. You should start with the main post and come back here for more details.

Environment

My benchmark environment is composed of three vms in

ProxySQL is a great tool. It’s one of the most recommended technologies in our Open Source Database practice.

Many of our clients are running it or are migrating towards it, but we’ve seen that it is pretty CPU-intensive. We’ve also seen strange behavior in the connection handling when reaching the CPU saturation point.

At this point, we noticed that the frontend_connections counter in the stats_mysql_users table was not decreasing even after the connections were no longer present at the network level. This counter is used to check the max_connections value in the mysql_users configuration table, causing frontend connections to receive a “Too many connections” error. So we determined that the key element here is to scale it properly. Obviously, all the major cloud providers can help us here as they all have features like auto-scaling groups.

Jervin Real of Percona has recently …

Ready to transition from a commercial database to open source, and want to know which databases are most popular in 2019? Wondering whether an on-premise vs. public cloud vs. hybrid cloud infrastructure is best for your database strategy? Or, considering adding a new database to your application and want to see which combinations are most popular? We found all the answers you need at the Percona Live event last month, and broke down the insights into the following free trends reports:

• Top Databases Used: Open Source vs. Commercial
• Cloud Infrastructure Analysis: Public Cloud vs. On-Premise vs. Hybrid Cloud
• Polyglot Persistence Trends: …

This is a post based on recent tutorials I published, with the goal of discussing how to prepare your current MySQL instance to be configured as an External Primary Server with a Replica/Follower into Google Cloud Platform.

First, I want to talk about the jargon used here. I will be using primary to represent the external “master” server, and replica to represent the “slave” server. Personally, I prefer the terms leader/follower but primary/replica currently seems to be more common in the industry. At some point, the word slave will be used, but because it is the keyword embedded on the server to represent a replica.

The steps given will be in the context of a VM running a one-click install of …

Introduction

In this article we will explore one approach for deploying ProxySQL behind a load balancer in Google Cloud.

While considering the deployment of ProxySQL, one has basically the following options:

1. Install ProxySQL on existing application server(s)
2. Provision dedicated ProxySQL server(s) between your application servers and the database layer.

Each approach has its pros and cons, but if there’s a significant number of application servers (more than a dozen or so) having a dedicated ProxySQL “layer” can be a more attractive option, specially if there is no service discovery mechanism in place (e.g. Consul).

Let’s consider a simple scenario, with a master and a small number of slaves in a single geographic region. Assuming that you are following the best practice, your database servers should be split into different availability zones. So for ProxySQL, it also …