[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: Slaving from Mirror Mode Masters
Thank you for taking the time to write.
My question however remains: we have eight busy LDAP slaves. "Should
they all slave from both masters?"
Or should they slave from the VIP (virtual IP that goes to only one
server on the basis of health checks)?
I completely understand that with mirror mode, writes go to only one
of the masters, and I can arrange that using LVS (Linux virtual
server) software, with the passive master the sorry server. That is
not the issue.
The question is: how to arrange the eight slaves?
On 03/09/12 18:06 -0700, Chris Jacobs wrote:
Mirrormode - active/passive fail over. Only writes and other various
meta properties will get to the active master.
The other node is a failover - ideally you shouldn't be making any
writes to it that would normally go to the primary.
As for load, etc, the site I manage has a pretty small directory, so
I can't offer any useful data.
Systems Administrator, Technology Services Group
Apollo Group | Apollo Marketing & Product Development | Aptimus, Inc.
1501 4th Ave | Suite 2500 | Seattle, WA 98101
direct 206.839.8245 | cell 206.601.3256 | Fax 206.644.0628
----- Original Message -----
From: openldap-technical-bounces@OpenLDAP.org <openldap-technical-bounces@OpenLDAP.org>
To: firstname.lastname@example.org <email@example.com>
Sent: Mon Sep 03 17:40:30 2012
Subject: Slaving from Mirror Mode Masters
We are setting up mirror mode masters with eight fairly heavily
loaded slaves (consumers).
Should they all slave from both masters?
An alternative is to slave from one, where a floating IP address is
that of "the master".
Please can anyone share their experience?
Would all slaves being consumers to two masters result in any marked
increased load on any of the servers?
Nick Urbanik http://nicku.org firstname.lastname@example.org
GPG: 7FFA CDC7 5A77 0558 DC7A 790A 16DF EC5B BB9D 2C24 ID: BB9D2C24