Serge Dubrouski wrote: > On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 2:56 PM, Dimitri Maziuk <dmaz...@bmrb.wisc.edu> wrote: >> Serge Dubrouski wrote: >>> Why not to use ldap syncrepl feature instead of DRBD? >> The problem with syncrepl is not the replication, it's the timeouts in >> the failover. As in you type "ls -l", your computer freezes for 5 minutes. > > With syncrepl you don't need a shared storage, so you can run LDAP as a clone.
What I mean is, with syncrepl you're looking at 2 active ldap servers. If you have 2 active ldap servers, the usual default is 2 minutes until your system gives up on one and tries to talk to the other. This takes place in response to any user action that involves uid, gid, or whatever else you my be storing in ldap. (E.g. "ls -l" needs to map uids to names.) The action is blocking, the shell freezes. As opposed to a cluster that monitors status of ldap service and fails over if there's a problem: the only way hb_takeover takes 2 minutes is if your drbd's developed split brain. And if you're lucky, it failed over before you typed "ls -l". Dima -- Dimitri Maziuk Programmer/sysadmin BioMagResBank, UW-Madison -- http://www.bmrb.wisc.edu _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
