Mark R Bannister wrote: > On 13/02/2015 18:54, Michael Ströder wrote: >> Mark R Bannister wrote: >>> Is it possible to configure syncrepl on the consumer side with a failover >>> policy so that if one provider goes down it can automatically retry against >>> another? >> On each consumer you should use separate syncrepl directives for each provider >> you want to get data from. Two providers -> two syncrepl statements. >> Note the hint about RID values for each syncrepl statement in the docs. >> >>> That would remove the need for separate load balancers. >> No need for any kind of load balancers serving syncrepl. >> I'd rather consider load balancers for replication harmful. > > So what you're saying is, in a > multi-master set-up with two > masters and multiple replicas, each replica would typically have two syncrepl > statements, one for each > of the masters? And that would mean we could take out any one master server > and not affect the > ability to replicate down the chain? Yes. Ciao, Michael.
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature