Umm.... As far as clusters go, packetfence is pretty damn easy.... IMHO..
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 3:47 PM, Tobias Friede <t.fri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> nice announcement, thanks for your great work !
>
> From: Ludovic Marcotte <lmarco...@inverse.ca>
> >Database Clustering - PacketFence v7 will make use of MariaDB Galera
> Cluster. Each PacketFence server will hold a copy of the database and any
> >cluster member detaching itself from the clustered environment will still
> work and handle endpoint connections gracefully. It will automatically
> >resynchronize itself to the cluster when network connectivity is restored;
>
>
> The big question is: will clustering be easier than in packetfence 6.x?
>
> The complicated cluster integration is one of the biggest disadvantage of
> packetfence, that's why we cluster Packetfence with VMware technologies and
> not with build in features.
> But VMware helps only in case of hardware and network issues and not in
> case of software issues, so I would prefer an integrated cluster mechanism.
>
>
> Greetings from Germany
> Tobias
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> PacketFence-users mailing list
> PacketFence-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/packetfence-users
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
PacketFence-users mailing list
PacketFence-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/packetfence-users
