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

RE: Replication: BerkeleyDB's vs. OpenLDAP's

> -----Original Message-----
> From: jehan.procaccia [mailto:jehan.procaccia@int-evry.fr]

> Does this mean that we can forget about slurpd and go on with bdb
> replication transparently to slapd slaves ?

There is no support in OpenLDAP for using the replication feature in BDB.
Replication is only supported using LDAP, as I already said. But slurpd is
only one of the supported LDAP replication mechanisms; the other is syncrepl.
At the moment, slurpd is the most stable of the two. Now that the
out-of-order replog problem has been fixed, I expect the only problems
remaining with slurpd are due to the replog growing too big when a slave is

> Howard Chu wrote:
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: owner-openldap-software@OpenLDAP.org
> >>[mailto:owner-openldap-software@OpenLDAP.org]On Behalf Of Jeff Leung

> >
> >>Hi,
> >>
> >>I was under the impression that OpenLDAP has its
> >>own method of
> >>replication that is completely unrelated to BerkeleyDB's.

> >Correct. OpenLDAP uses the LDAP protocol for replication, it
> >does not rely on anything else.