[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: slapd, bdb, 32-bit -> 64-bit
On 16. okt. 2006, at 12.08, Buchan Milne wrote:
On Monday 16 October 2006 09:56, Frode Nordahl wrote:
On 16. okt. 2006, at 03.08, matthew sporleder wrote:
I also have a large database (my slapcat-ed file is over 4gb), but I
don't see how it's more reliable to shutdown a spare for one hour
while you scp versus four hours while you slapadd. What's the
difference? A minute's worth of replication to catch-up with?
I would have to take the slave down to do the slapcat as well,
No, you can slapcat while the slave is running.
Wouldn't that leave the LDIF in a inconsistent state? Or is slapcat
protected by a transaction?
guess the time difference between slapcat and tar of the binary files
is next to nil.
The whole point for having the spare slave is to take it down at the
same time as I add a new replica to the master servers configuration.
That way the slapcat / binary copy will be in a good state, and the
replication will start at the right spot.
As soon as the slapcat or binary copy is done the replication can
start on the slave again.
I can probably evade this by using syncrepl instead?
Yes, if you're using sync-repl, there is no need for this. Take any
snapshot of the database, slapadd on the consumer, start it up, and
catch up. Or, if you can wait a little bit longer, skip the whole
slapcat/slapadd step entirely.
Thanks, I will look into converting to syncrepl.