[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

RE: syncrepl questions

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-openldap-devel@OpenLDAP.org
> [mailto:owner-openldap-devel@OpenLDAP.org]On Behalf Of Hallvard B Furuseth

> Kurt D. Zeilenga writes:
> > Second, we just started this Syncrepl experiment.  I suspect
> > Syncrepl will prove to be better than the slurpd approach
> > in almost all deployments.  I also suspect that some deployments
> > will need a far more sophisticated replication engine than either
> > syncrepl and slurpd provide.
> For example, the University of Oslo needs update operations
> which do not
> return until all the servers have been updated, or maybe a 'sync this
> particular DN' operation which is performed after an update operation
> and only returns when that entry has been synced to all the servers.
> Lacking that, we simply use independent master servers and run each
> update operation against all of them.

I had considered this design once before; it would be pretty easy to
implement using back-ldap in an overlay in serial form. Concurrently updating
multiple targets would be a bit more effort. This simple approach using
back-ldap would have no resilience; if any target servers are unavailable
then you lose...

Though the basic "update everyone" concept is simple enough, we'd still need
LDAP transactions to make it clean, which would allow for consistent

  -- Howard Chu
  Chief Architect, Symas Corp.       Director, Highland Sun
  http://www.symas.com               http://highlandsun.com/hyc
  Symas: Premier OpenSource Development and Support