<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: New white paper: Guide to Optimizing Performance of the MySQL Cluster Database</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.clusterdb.com/mysql-cluster/new-white-paper-guide-to-optimizing-performance-of-the-mysql-cluster-database/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.clusterdb.com/mysql-cluster/new-white-paper-guide-to-optimizing-performance-of-the-mysql-cluster-database/</link>
	<description>MySQL Cluster database &#38; MySQL Replication</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Aug 2010 08:05:11 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: admin</title>
		<link>http://www.clusterdb.com/mysql-cluster/new-white-paper-guide-to-optimizing-performance-of-the-mysql-cluster-database/comment-page-1/#comment-3033</link>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2009 17:44:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.clusterdb.com/?p=779#comment-3033</guid>
		<description>Hi John,

 I don&#039;t have any material comparing the products but the fundamental technology differences are:

 - Oracle RAC is a shared-everything Clustering solution; the up-side is that every node in
   the cluster can see all of the data which may help when you have a query that needs to
   traverse all of the data. The downside is that the shared storage can be more expensive
   and recovery from failures may take longer.
 - MySQL Cluster is shared-nothing. The advantage is that you can scale-out with low cost
   hardware and recovery from failures is &lt;strong&gt;extremely &lt;/strong&gt;fast. Downsides
   are that complex joins can be slow as the data is distributed amongst the data nodes.
 - TimesTen is most typically used as a cache sitting between the application and an 
   Oracle database. TT (at least the last time I checked) doesn&#039;t scale horizontally

Regards, Andrew.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi John,</p>
<p> I don&#8217;t have any material comparing the products but the fundamental technology differences are:</p>
<p> &#8211; Oracle RAC is a shared-everything Clustering solution; the up-side is that every node in<br />
   the cluster can see all of the data which may help when you have a query that needs to<br />
   traverse all of the data. The downside is that the shared storage can be more expensive<br />
   and recovery from failures may take longer.<br />
 &#8211; MySQL Cluster is shared-nothing. The advantage is that you can scale-out with low cost<br />
   hardware and recovery from failures is <strong>extremely </strong>fast. Downsides<br />
   are that complex joins can be slow as the data is distributed amongst the data nodes.<br />
 &#8211; TimesTen is most typically used as a cache sitting between the application and an<br />
   Oracle database. TT (at least the last time I checked) doesn&#8217;t scale horizontally</p>
<p>Regards, Andrew.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John DePietro</title>
		<link>http://www.clusterdb.com/mysql-cluster/new-white-paper-guide-to-optimizing-performance-of-the-mysql-cluster-database/comment-page-1/#comment-3030</link>
		<dc:creator>John DePietro</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2009 12:30:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.clusterdb.com/?p=779#comment-3030</guid>
		<description>Does Sun have information regarding comparison of MySQL vs. Oracle and TimesTen DB Clustering?

Do you know of any independent evaluations that could be helpful for comparison purpose?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Does Sun have information regarding comparison of MySQL vs. Oracle and TimesTen DB Clustering?</p>
<p>Do you know of any independent evaluations that could be helpful for comparison purpose?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
