Dynadot

Question regarding MYSQL Server

NameSilo
Watch
Impact
0
Hello,

I have a good host and signed up with them again after trying out another host for a year. They have my websites on one server and MYSQL databases on another server. The two servers are around 40 minutes away from each (meaning they are in different cities). Do you think that it matters as far as speed goes. There is an option to have the databases moved to my websites server location. However, there is no option to have the websites moved to the MYSQL server location.

The MYSQL server is really fast and handles large requests quicker from what I remember.

Should I request the move to have them both in the same building?
 
Last edited:
0
•••
The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
Test the latency between the two locations, I'm sure they have a 'direct connection' of some sort. I doubt it is anything that will impact your site at all. Generally speaking, you want your stack to be in 1 location, but having 2 could be a fail safe.
 
0
•••
I prefer to keep everything on the main server if possible, from the database to all files served. If the main server is up, everything should be up. Having to depend on some server 40 miles or 400 miles away is not something I want to deal with.
 
0
•••
I prefer to keep everything on the main server if possible, from the database to all files served. If the main server is up, everything should be up. Having to depend on some server 40 miles or 400 miles away is not something I want to deal with.

This in essence could be a 'CDN' keeping his site live 24/7 though. One fail safe at a cheap host until the main data server comes online, he's got the redundancy of files from copying updates daily and connecting to the same MySQL server. The only bad thing that could happen is the MySQL server going down, then it's pretty much useless unless both servers (files) are serving static content.
 
0
•••
Thanks for the responses.
 
0
•••
Do you think that it matters as far as speed goes.

absolutely. by connecting to mysql server remotely you just add another layer of latency. and i doubt they have the locations connected via lan assuming they are 60km apart.

Should I request the move to have them both in the same building?

yes. and ideally have them connected directly at 10gb/s or better. otherwise theres no much sense in paying for fast sql server at all
 
0
•••
So you have two servers at separate locations but no redundancy. Sad :)
 
0
•••
So you have two servers at separate locations but no redundancy. Sad :)

Actually everything is automatically backed up several times per day.
 
0
•••
Actually everything is automatically backed up several times per day.

backup, cdn, load balancing etc etc.. thats another story... you asked about speed - whats the use of paying for blazing speed <1ms sql queries out off your super speedy mysql server when fetched results are being delivered with 10-20-50ms latency via public tcp/http connection back to your application server ..probably theres even dns resolving taking place on every request (check that, your mysql and app server should be at least on the same subnet) if the two hosts are not on the same lan.. theres absolutely no arguments to have a production sql database hosted on a remote server placed miles away from app server, very strange and useless topology indeed
 
1
•••
Back