[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: cn=config: sharing, conditionals
I ought to try syncrepl before talking too much, but anyway:
Quanah Gibson-Mount writes:
> It sounds like it gracefully solves the ability of keeping both master
> and replica configurations around for the most part. What still
> remains sticky is ACLs. There are plenty of valid reasons for the
> master to have very different ACLs than the replicas do.
And things like <authz-policy> and <allow>. Security settings, if you
run a master inside a well protected subnet and partial slaves on more
Master and slave can share some but not all databases, and you might
want to replicate config of those they share - but this way the database
numbers will differ. Might not share all related schema either.
<threads>, cache settings, <argsfile>, etc. if your servers run on
different OSes. Which can be useful so that if an OS-specific problem
hits one server, others are in no danger.
I'm sure there are good reasons for plenty of other things to differ,
while config-replication could still be useful. Depends on how flexible
partial config-replication is intended to be.