Zimbra offers Open Source email server software and shared calendar for Linux and the Mac
Go Back   Zimbra :: Forums > Zimbra Collaboration Suite > Administrators

Welcome to the Zimbra :: Forums!
Welcome, if you would like to post a comment please register. We also encourage you to explore all things Zimbra with our team and members of the community.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 07-05-2010, 03:03 AM
Senior Member
 
Posts: 51
Default Using a separate MySQL server?

Hi all

I have a small environment consisting of one server running MySQL and KVM virtualisation with a few VMs. These VMs are webservers, general 'toy' servers and a Zimbra VM. Since the host is already running MySQL, and has better I/O than a VM will ever have, how can I have the Zimbra VM use the external MySQL server and not its own?

roy
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 07-05-2010, 03:10 AM
Zimbra Consultant & Moderator
 
Posts: 20,313
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RoyK View Post
...how can I have the Zimbra VM use the external MySQL server and not its own?
The simple answer is, you can't. Zimbra is designed and installed as a complete package (the packages are tuned for the requirements of Zimbra) and should be installed on a server without any other applications running on it.
__________________
Regards


Bill
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 07-05-2010, 03:18 AM
Senior Member
 
Posts: 51
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by phoenix View Post
The simple answer is, you can't. Zimbra is designed and installed as a complete package (the packages are tuned for the requirements of Zimbra) and should be installed on a server without any other applications running on it.
I don't get it - it's just MySQL running here, and running MySQL separately for a separate application is far from optimal. Database servers should run separately, so what I'm talking about is true tuning. Most other systems have a common config file or something into which changes can be made.

Where can I find this for Zimbra? I hope you're not going to tell me all that is hardcoded?

roy
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 07-06-2010, 01:37 AM
Moderator
 
Posts: 7,928
Default

Sorry; but as Phoenix has already indicated the MySQL instance has been built for and configured for Zimbra's use and hence it is deployed as part of the complete package. One reason will be versioning as it allows Zimbra to ensure that what they ship has passed all QA controls.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 07-06-2010, 11:11 AM
Elite Member
 
Posts: 281
Default

Think of Zimbra as a black-box, forget about its internal components. It's one, single unit, and should be treated as one single unit.

Don't try to make Zimbra work with a separate Postfix install.
Don't try to make Zimbra work with a separate Spamassassin install.
Don't try to make Zimbra work with a separate MySQL install.
Don't try to make Zimbra work with a separate OpenLDAP install.
etc

Install Zimrba, use Zimbra, look at Zimbra, there's nothing but Zimbra. It truly is greater than the sum of its parts.
__________________
Freddie
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 07-07-2010, 10:41 AM
Advanced Member
 
Posts: 214
Default

but i agree that it isnt optimal.

i understand the blackbox concept BUT databaseserver are an different animal specially mysqldatabases and their behaivior.

theres a lot todo which CANT be tuned out of the box (since zimbra cannot know ever how many user/ram on my db server is) for example.

or disksystem.. on high performance mysql server i would not recommend using a raid 5 while i do recommend it for a regular storage server like zimbra


but about the seperate mysql instance theres one thing you shoudl think about:
Never ever you can loose the connection to the DB server or many things can go wrong in zimbra

also performance might not be better (can go even much worse) since simbra is talking with its db by socket not IP (which is a lot faster) and you will not run intro trouble with persistent connection/or to many open tcp requests (you know 65k on one machine and its frozen to death)

so tehre are actually many cons having a dedicated mysql server away from the zimbra server itself BUT it should be possible
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 07-07-2010, 11:50 PM
Zimbra Consultant & Moderator
 
Posts: 20,313
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bofh View Post
or disksystem.. on high performance mysql server i would not recommend using a raid 5 while i do recommend it for a regular storage server like zimbra
It's not recommended to use RAID5 at all (except for the smallest installations and even then I wouldn't recommend it): Performance Tuning Guidelines for Large Deployments - Zimbra :: Wiki
__________________
Regards


Bill
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 07-08-2010, 09:46 AM
Advanced Member
 
Posts: 214
Default

its not recommended for zimbra but it is for normal storage operations.
in zimbra its obiviouse. mysql and ldap performance dropping to nowheres land in worst case :-)
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 07-08-2010, 10:20 AM
Moderator
 
Posts: 7,928
Default

Quote:
raid 5 while i do recommend it for a regular storage server like zimbra
that is contentious as it depends on whether you require quick writes or quick reads. Have to bear in mind that Zimba, AFAIK, does cache via Java so quicker writes would be of more benefit.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 09-07-2010, 01:46 AM
New Member
 
Posts: 4
Default And is it good?

I was hoping to find a solution to this problem!
Nothing special in mySQL server from this blackbox, but some time need use DBMS from one place.
Very need to move the server in another location, but impossible. I so disappointment...
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes


Similar Threads

Why Join?

Registering let's you ask questions, makes it easier to search, displays any files attached to posts, and notifies you about replies.

blog.zimbra.com




 

SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.