Yes, I am using the in-memory mysql with that cumbersome setup.
I thought about MEMORY engine but the differences are too large to
consider it as alternate for INNODB in memory.
http://dev.mysql.com/tech-resources/articles/storage-engine/part_3.html
Udai
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Virtualization is moving to the mainstream and overtaking non-virtualized
environment for deploying applications. Does it make network security
easier or more difficult to achieve? Read this whitepaper to separate the
two and get a better understanding.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/hp-phase2-d2d
Additionally, I have a folder for persisting the tmpfs partition. That
way I don't have to recreate the mifos databases each time. I also use a
script to do the setup.
#!/bin/bash
umount tmpfs
mount -t tmpfs -o size=400M tmpfs /opt/ram
MYSQL_DATA="/opt/ram/mysqldata"
RAM_PERSISTENCE="/opt/ram_persistence/mysqldata"
mkdir -p $MYSQL_DATA
cp $RAM_PERSISTENCE/* $MYSQL_DATA -R
chown mysql /opt/ram -R
service mysql stop
service mysql start
exit 0
#end of script
The only problem I have with this setup is that if I have to use another
application that requires mysql, I have to change datadir and restart
mysql. An alternative will be to setup two mysql instances on different
ports.
Regards,
Kojo
I think the ram-backed MySQL solution Udai, Hatim and I discussed (and
use) is a good-enough bridge solution until we get to--IMHO--the *real*
solution of better code and less and better-written functional
(integration and acceptance) tests.
> Adam/Udai I found your thread ... are you actively using this still?
> Works well? It's a little cumbersome to set-up... ;)
Yes, yes, yes.
> just ranting. Worth a Wiki page?
Yes, please! Stop ranting and make that page already. :D
Generally my builds were in the 13-15 minute range, but the last one I
ran actually took 22 minutes--I'm not sure why.