<quote who="Howard Chu"> > Gavin Henry wrote: >> <quote who="Chris G. Sellers"> >>> I think too, the idea is you treat the second master server as a slave >>> in practice, meaning you never do updates to it unless the primary >>> master is down. >>> >>> Effectively, the difference from a Master/Slave setup is that you will >>> not have to promote the Slave to a Master and adjust any replication >>> agreement settings in the event of a failed server. >>> >>> Is that a fair analysis ? >> >> Pretty much and also that the configurations are exactly the same, bar >> where the Syncrepl points to and ServerID > > In fact, using the ServerID the configurations can be exactly the same, > period. (Use both syncrepl configurations on both servers. The ServerID > will > be used to prevent a server from redundantly connecting to itself.) So you > don't have to adjust any settings at all for automatic failover and > recovery.
AH, ok. So a unique ServerID is the only req. I'll update the MM docs in the Guide. Thanks. > -- > -- Howard Chu > Chief Architect, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com > Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/ > Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/ >
