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

Re: syncrepl issue

--On Monday, January 28, 2013 3:59 PM +0100 Meike Stone <meike.stone@googlemail.com> wrote:

a) Use a current release.  That would be 2.4.33.
b) Delta-syncrepl supports MMR in current releases
c) The reason I suggest delta-syncrepl is because syncrepl is known to be
problematic, particularly with MMR.  If you want reliable replication,
use delta-syncrepl.

Is it recommended in MMR setups to use delta-syncrepl before syncrepl
in general?

It is by me.

Are there any disadvantages, like using more RAM, or other things to

That depends on the backend, and your filesystem. If your backend is bdb/hdb, then the masters have to be tuned for both DBs with BDB. With all backends, there is increased write activity, so the filesystem selection can be significant, particularly if the filesystem used requires journaling.

I will note I've been using delta-syncrepl since 2005, and it has never had the abundance of issues present in syncrepl.



Quanah Gibson-Mount
Sr. Member of Technical Staff
Zimbra, Inc
A Division of VMware, Inc.
Zimbra ::  the leader in open source messaging and collaboration