4 ms·

I was unfamiliar with Clustrix. It looks like they've been around a while (YC06) and have some sophisticated technology (http://docs.clustrix.com/display/CLXDOC

I was unfamiliar with Clustrix. It looks like they've been around a while (YC06) and have some sophisticated technology (http://docs.clustrix.com/display/CLXDOC/Distributed+Database+Architecture http://docs.clustrix.com/display/CLXDOC/Distributed+Database...). A horizontally scalable drop in replacement for MySQL is nothing to sneeze at. https://www.clustrix.com/ https://www.clustrix.com/

ddorian43 8y ago
I think it's in-memory. There is mysql-ndb-cluster free.
- newnewpdro 8y ago
  > I think it's in-memory. In-memory support was added later, though I'm not sure if it made it into a release as I stopped paying attention around when they started developing that feature. They originally ran exclusively on specialized appliances having battery-backed write caches. The implementation is all in C using Linux AIO w/epoll. It's a sophisticated, high-performance storage engine. When everyone shifted to the cloud and stopped owning hardware, Clustrix was forced to add a file-based backend. This still uses the high-performance AIO+epoll engine.
- meguest 8y ago
  I spent a lot of time at a previous job supporting an NDB cluster and I can attest first hand that it is awful. Single node failures cause entire cluster shutdowns, the cluster then takes forever to recover and must be done in a specific order. In fact just thinking about it makes me anxious.
  - ddorian43 8y ago
    What version was this ?
newnewpdro 8y ago
There's some technical information still available on Sergei's old company blog: http://sergei.clustrix.com/ http://sergei.clustrix.com/
reiger 8y ago
I believe many of their founders were ex-Isilon people.
spooneybarger 8y ago
We used it at a previous employer of mine. It had a few quirks but in the end, it saved the company from a mountain of technical debt by allowing us to avoid a huge rewrite to address database scaling issues that were becoming intractable.

ddorian43 8y ago

I think it's in-memory. There is mysql-ndb-cluster free.

newnewpdro 8y ago
> I think it's in-memory. In-memory support was added later, though I'm not sure if it made it into a release as I stopped paying attention around when they started developing that feature. They originally ran exclusively on specialized appliances having battery-backed write caches. The implementation is all in C using Linux AIO w/epoll. It's a sophisticated, high-performance storage engine. When everyone shifted to the cloud and stopped owning hardware, Clustrix was forced to add a file-based backend. This still uses the high-performance AIO+epoll engine.
meguest 8y ago
I spent a lot of time at a previous job supporting an NDB cluster and I can attest first hand that it is awful. Single node failures cause entire cluster shutdowns, the cluster then takes forever to recover and must be done in a specific order. In fact just thinking about it makes me anxious.
- ddorian43 8y ago
  What version was this ?

newnewpdro 8y ago

There's some technical information still available on Sergei's old company blog: http://sergei.clustrix.com/ http://sergei.clustrix.com/

reiger 8y ago

I believe many of their founders were ex-Isilon people.

spooneybarger 8y ago

We used it at a previous employer of mine. It had a few quirks but in the end, it saved the company from a mountain of technical debt by allowing us to avoid a huge rewrite to address database scaling issues that were becoming intractable.