[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: MirrorMode and chaining - are slaves needed?
----- "Ryan Steele" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Hi folks,
> I'm in the process of setting up about six nodes, and tossing around
> the idea of having either 2 masters in MirrorMode
> (traffic to the "active" master is managed externally) with 4 slaves
> (each of whom will refer their writes to the active
> master). I'm automating some of the setup, and in an effort to
> simplify the configuration, was wondering if I might be
> better served by simply having 6 masters with an identical
> configuration, each of which refer their writes to the active
> master (a separate IP/hostname on a virtual interface on one of the
> So, the question becomes, 'are there any downsides I'm not aware of?'
> It seems to me that the advantage with the 6
> masters is that, aside from the consolidation of configs for the
> automated setup, I now have 6 write-capable nodes
> instead of 2. And, provided I chain the writes to the active master,
> I shouldn't have to worry about incompatible
> writes/partitioning. Any thoughts, advice, recommendations? Thanks!
If you have 6 masters you don't need to chain anything as that is Multi Master.
I'm confused as to why you are chaining from a master to an active master. You should have
either two MirrorMode nodes (with management) and chaining slaves or full Multi Master.
The way you've described above isn't very clear and sounds messy. What your clients/apps need
from the slaves? What is the usage pattern etc.
T +44 (0) 1224 279484
M +44 (0) 7930 323266
F +44 (0) 1224 824887
Open Source. Open Solutions(tm).
Suretec Systems is a limited company registered in Scotland. Registered
number: SC258005. Registered office: 24 Cormack Park, Rothienorman, Inverurie,
Aberdeenshire, AB51 8GL.
Subject to disclaimer at http://www.suretecgroup.com/disclaimer.html