timp87 at gmail.com
Mon Mar 30 12:16:41 UTC 2015
I'm a bit surprised that we don't have ports for galera cluster.
I want to discuss about them a little bit.
In short about galera and how it works (how I understand it):
it's a kind of cluster of MySQL-based DBs. They support MySQL, Percona
and MariaDB right now.
Web site http://galeracluster.com/.
1. A special version of MySQL-based DB daemon, patched to work with
wsrep API. It can be MySQL Galera Cluster, Percona XtraDB Cluster or
MariaDB Galera CLuster.
2. A common "plugin" for them all, which is plugged in through my.cnf.
It's called "Galera 3 wsrep provider library" usually.
3. Arbitrator - a DB daemon without data to prevent split-brain and etc.
Cluster version of MySQL-based DB daemons are usually(always?) synced
with non-cluster regular versions.
We have a port only for #2 now - databases/galera (which is useless in
such case, no?).
There is no port for #3 at all.
There are a couple of PRs to add #1 to ports tree, which were created
about a year ago. No progress since then.
However, I'd like to discuss about something. It's just my thoughts.
1. As you can see those PRs are trying to add *-server and *-client
ports for each of clustered MySQL-based DBs (I know, not for Percona).
Is there any need to add another yet version of client?
What's a reason to make *-client ports? Because nothing depends on
IMO we should use regular ports for clients and add only a server
part, as Linuxes does. For example, databases/mysql56-client for MySQL
Galera Cluster. In such case a lot of work to add a dependency for new
*-client is not needed.
2. How *-server ports should be named? At first glance the obvious names are:
Not bad, but what about the same names, but without (galera|xtradb)
word? Or without "cluster" word.
Like databases/mysql56-cluster next to databases/mysql56-server and
How do you think?
More information about the freebsd-ports