Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
--On Tuesday, March 02, 2010 7:58 PM +0100 masar...@aero.polimi.it wrote:
25 consumers doing a full refresh probably ate up all threads
available on
the producer. You should either cascade your consumers (build a
replication chain where a layer of consumers acts as
On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 3:37 PM, Howard Chu wrote:
>> to my understanding the admin guide on mirrormode is misleading.
>> http://www.openldap.org/doc/admin24/replication.html#MirrorMode
>> According to this documentation both nodes have to be put into
>> mirror mode, as far as I understand the con
--On Wednesday, March 03, 2010 9:05 AM +0900 Jorgen Lundman
wrote:
* Investigate delta-sync
Unknown to me, will need to research if our current ldap software version
can support it. Perhaps try it on the test-servers.
Quite frankly, in the OpenLDAP 2.3 branch, this is the only viable
repli
Hey folks,
In order to provide stability to my OpenLDAP clients in the event of a network
outage, I would like to implement some
client-side caching. I've done some research, and have concluded that nscd is
evil and should be avoided at all costs,
and thus eventually settled on using back-ldap
Ryan Steele wrote:
Hey folks,
In order to provide stability to my OpenLDAP clients in the event of a
network outage, I would like to implement some
client-side caching. I've done some research, and have concluded that nscd
is evil and should be avoided at all costs,
It's not necesarily evil,
Brett @Google wrote:
I wonder out of interest, is it legal to have something like the
following on both nodes (that is with two different rid=xxx syncrepl
statements) ?
Yes.
This would in theory allow the same config on both servers, assuming
it was acceptable config-wise.
Cheers
Brett
---
