Re: slurpd vs ldapsync

[Emmanuel Dreyfus <manu@netbsd.org>]

On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 02:44:19AM -0700, Howard Chu wrote:
> Just because the protocol was defined a particular way (consumer 
> initiated single master replication) doesn't mean it can't be used in 
> other ways. OpenLDAP is far more flexible than that. We've enhanced the 
> basic syncrepl functionality a number of different ways (delta-syncrepl, 
> proxied syncrepl, mirrormode, and multimaster) all without altering any 
> of the syncrepl protocol definition. All it takes is a little creativity 
> to assemble the pieces in the proper order.

And what are the reasons for not using slurpd? It has less functionnalities,
but can it be considered reliable? Should I change my working setup for 
syncrepl, or can I live with slurpd?

-- 
Emmanuel Dreyfus
manu@netbsd.org