[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: MirrorMode behind fail over loadbalancer
Gavin Henry wrote:
<quote who="Chris G. Sellers">
I think too, the idea is you treat the second master server as a slave
in practice, meaning you never do updates to it unless the primary
master is down.
Effectively, the difference from a Master/Slave setup is that you will
not have to promote the Slave to a Master and adjust any replication
agreement settings in the event of a failed server.
Is that a fair analysis ?
Pretty much and also that the configurations are exactly the same, bar
where the Syncrepl points to and ServerID
In fact, using the ServerID the configurations can be exactly the same,
period. (Use both syncrepl configurations on both servers. The ServerID will
be used to prevent a server from redundantly connecting to itself.) So you
don't have to adjust any settings at all for automatic failover and recovery.
-- Howard Chu
Chief Architect, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com
Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/