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

syncrepl and glue

I'm attempting to migrate from slurpd replication to syncrepl, however
I'm having some problems which I think arise from the way my tree is
glued together.  I've taken a look at test33, however my database setup
is somewhat more complex than that  and I think this is where my
problems are coming from...

This is what test33 does...
                |             dc=example,dc=com /
           db1  |                              / \____________
                | ou=People                   /   | ou=Groups |
                |____________________________/    |           | db3
    __________________|__________________         | (entries) |
db2 | ou=Information Technology Division |        |___________|
    |                                    |
    |             (entries)              |

Where the three dbs are glued together, db1 is not replicated, db2 is a
syncrepl provider on one slapd instance and a consumer on the other, db3
is the other way around.

Compare this to my existing setup using slurpd (simplified version)

   |                         dc=example,dc=com
db1| ou=People  ou=Groups      ou=sites    ou=policy   ou=printers
(etc..)  | 
   | (entries)  (entries)             ___  (entries)   (entries)
   |_______________________ ou=site1 | |
                           |(entries)| |\
                           |_________| | \
                                       |  \
                             __________|   \__________ 
                             |ou=site2 |     |ou=site3 |
                         db2 |(entries)|     |(entries)| db3
                             |_________|     |_________|

In fact there are more ou's in db1 and two more dbs for sites 4 and 5.
Each server is master for one db and replica for the others and all are
glued together.

I'm currently running 2.3.16 on Solaris 9 with ppolicy overlay.  The
above setup has been replicating fine for some time using slurpd.
Attempting to use syncrepl it seems that syncrepl on the top level
database is not restricted to entries within that db.  I'm not sure
whether the issue is at the provider or consumer (or both) as my inital
tests seem to have produced contradictory results (one test appears to
have overwritten the entries in db2 (on the provider) with entires from
its replica on the db1 master server, and a second test deleted all the
entires in db2 (on the provider).

Does anyone know if its even possible to do what I'm trying to do?  And
if so what I might be missing?

Kevin Spicer
Unix Systems Specialist
Millward Brown UK Limited


BMRB wins two BMRA awards - http://www.bmrb.co.uk
This message (and any attachment) is intended only for the 
recipient and may contain confidential and/or privileged 
material.  If you have received this in error, please contact the 
sender and delete this message immediately.  Disclosure, copying 
or other action taken in respect of this email or in 
reliance on it is prohibited.  BMRB Limited accepts no liability 
in relation to any personal emails, or content of any email which 
does not directly relate to our business.