Re: poor performance of OpenLDAP vs AD?

[Tomasz Chmielewski <mangoo@interia.pl>]

(...)

> >  On the other hand, there seems to be
> >  much overhead concerned with additional data that goes around to keep
> >  this multimaster state in sync.
>
>
> And here is where the argument really falls down - all else is Not 
> equal, their replication protocol requires a huge amount of metadata to 
> maintain synchronization for each update.

Thanks for all your input.

Perhaps it's my last concern.

In a multi-master case, we can modify/add/delete entries even when the 
physical connection between the servers is broken (WAN/VPN down etc.).
After the connection is back, they will sync according to some alghoritm 
(mostly timestamps, and if they happen to be equal, then the 
"supermaster" overwrites all other changes).

In a master-slave scenario, when the connection to a master is broken, 
we can't make any updates/modifications on a slave, which sometimes can 
be a major drawback.

Or perhaps it's possible to configure OpenLDAP in a way, that we can 
"temporarily" edit slave database when the connection to the master is 
broken, and when the connection is back, changes are sent to the master, 
which in turn decides on what to do with it?



(...)


--
Tomek

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Najnowsze wiadomosci!!! >>> http://link.interia.pl/f18a0