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

Re: Failover Master setup

That's not a bad idea, actually!  

On Fri, 2005-06-24 at 10:37, matthew sporleder wrote:
> I didn't say move just the IP.  Move the mount (via SAN or NAS) and the IP.
> Take the -entire- application with you on failure.  That way, you
> don't have to worry about staying in-sync in real-time, which neither
> slurpd nor syncrepl can guarantee.
> On 6/24/05, Digant C Kasundra <digant@uta.edu> wrote:
> > Simply moving an virtual IP is insufficient.  An app that needs to talk
> > to the master will also likely want to make queries against it.  So, in
> > a failover setup, the secondary master has to stay in sync with the
> > master.  In other words, slurpd has to be replicating to it at all times
> > and the secondary should not be replicating to anyone else (it should
> > act as a slave).  When the primary goes down, the secondary has to
> > realize it is now in charge or replicating to the slaves.
> > 
> > -- DK
Digant C Kasundra
Enterprise Operations and Systems
Office of Information Technology
University of Texas at Arlington
Ph: 817-272-2208
GnuPG Public Key: http://omega.uta.edu/~digant/digant.gpg.asc

To request technical support, please contact our computing Help Desk at
817-272-2208, e-mail helpdesk@uta.edu or create a work order at

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part