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

Re: Is this a sensible architecture?

To: Nick Urbanik <nick.urbanik@optusnet.com.au>
Subject: Re: Is this a sensible architecture?
From: Aaron Richton <richton@nbcs.rutgers.edu>
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 13:22:52 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: Brett Watson <tfbw.optus@240gl.org>, openldap-technical@openldap.org
In-reply-to: <20120314234509.GD18458@nick.optusnet.com.au>
References: <CAJb8Dwzd+X_EHA9_6Fg7m9z5x0be8p_7_da1hgr_fTg0UbQ8Wg@mail.gmail.com> <CAJb8DwxB+rhthKHppoyCHs651EHU0KnBLFZhVE_0scvz0r0yew@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.SOC.2.02.1203140950110.19644@toolbox.rutgers.edu> <20120314234509.GD18458@nick.optusnet.com.au>
User-agent: Alpine 2.02 (SOC 1266 2009-07-14)

On Thu, 15 Mar 2012, Nick Urbanik wrote:

Test what? Replicating from the VIP to the slaves or replicating fromboth masters to the slaves?

The VIP is out of band relative to OpenLDAP. Traffic direction is assumedto exist, apart from OpenLDAP Software, so you won't find code/tests onpoint within OpenLDAP. But replication, including starting back up after afailure, is covered in the test suite. See, for example, test050 andtest063.

References:
- Is this a sensible architecture?
  - From: Brett Watson <tfbw.optus@240gl.org>
- Re: Is this a sensible architecture?
  - From: Aaron Richton <richton@nbcs.rutgers.edu>
- Re: Is this a sensible architecture?
  - From: Nick Urbanik <nick.urbanik@optusnet.com.au>

Prev by Date: RE: OPENLDAP SYNCREPL
Next by Date: WINDOWS AD CLIENTS & LINUX LDAP CLIENTS UNABLE TO OPEN X-WINDOWS EMULATORS
Index(es):
- Chronological
- Thread