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

Re: n-way replication question


Pierangelo Masarati <ando@sys-net.it> writes:

> Dieter Kluenter wrote:
>> "Dieter Kluenter" <dieter@dkluenter.de> writes:
>>> Mavric Domen <d.mavric@iskratel.si> writes:
>>>> Hi,
>>>> I'm facing a similar issue, but I've noticed that this only happens if
>>>> one of the master "consumer" servers is restarted. Up to that time it
>>>> seems the synchronization works perfectly. I had no chance to
>>>> investigate this in details, but it might help to discover a reason
>>>> for the problem.
>> initial contextCSN on localhost
>> contextCSN: 20081022151212.263032Z#000000#000#000000
>> initial contextCSN on remote peer
>> contextCSN: 20081022151212.263032Z#000000#000#000000
>> after a modification on localhost
>> entryCSN: 20081022151026.029523Z#000000#000#000000
>> on remote peer
>> contextCSN: 20081022151212.263032Z#000000#000#000000
>> I just wonder wether this is a new bug or is it silly me.
> AFAIK, the SID in each contextCSN should be anything but "000" (it
> should be the serverID of the server that received the write and
> propagated the modification).

OK, than I presume that is a bug, unless I get other comments I will
file an ITS.


Dieter KlÃnter | Systemberatung