« first day (2756 days earlier)      last day (2120 days later) » 

1:03 PM
-1
A: MySQL Group Replication multi-primary - add new member

Joachim ukabaI'm about to do my end-of-cycle work on data backup in a remote server, so I chose to work with claud, I wanted to ensure that all data entered in my database mysql data, then synchronize automatically in the claud. So what are the procedures to do to get there? I use the php language and the mys...

Let's ask a question in an answer. Oh, and while at it, embed a photo of myself...
@EvanCarroll Why bother? Why not just use a container?
 
@Colin'tHart the "claud" ...
 
I don't want a multi-tenant. I need to build the table with JSON datatype in mind. — Vidhya 18 mins ago
OK, have fun!
 
1:22 PM
@Colin'tHart I don't think they want multi-tenant. Not what the common use of the term means.
I think they want a separate database/schema for each application.
In multi-tenant the separate databases/schemas are usually identical or similar and the application(s) can access any of them.
I (think) they are talking about different applications, so different schema designs in each db
@Colin'tHart As for the JSON, yeah, they can dig the whole to bury themselves in any shape they like, Json / relational / whatever ... ;)
 
 
2 hours later…
3:14 PM
@Colin'tHart because I don't actually want nor care for isolation, I just want it to work. And the kernel handles that fine. I can also easily integrate that with systemd, so the chroot is seemless.
With Docker I think it's substantially more work
The problem is that MS has built SQL Server with the assumption that it has access to SystemD (which is horrible for a lot of reasons), but that causes difficulty in either approach
Most apps create a PID file to see if they're currently running or check ps. SQL Server checks systemd which it assumes that it has access to
 
4:09 PM
@EvanCarroll So much for SQL Server on Slackware then.
 
 
1 hour later…
5:25 PM
@ConcernedOfTunbridgeWells Nah where there is Evan there is Hope.
 
 
4 hours later…
9:01 PM
@AndriyM As a small side note from the starred message there is a minor difference between efficient and performant, as commonly used. efficient is usually closer associated to work/watts, performant is closer to work/time.
This is why I think we should standardize on "more better" it explicitly means vague improvement and that's good enough for our purposes.
 
9:31 PM
How about 'More Hoopy?'
 

« first day (2756 days earlier)      last day (2120 days later) »