2011/8/19 Tuure Laurinolli
>
> On Aug 19, 2011, at 07:57 , David Rader wrote:
>
> > It looks like the HA implementation is for eventual consistency, tunable
> by how often a slave polls the master for updates from other nodes.
> >
> > With a load balanced cluster, is the best practice to simply u
ster and
> dynamically update a load balancer to correctly direct traffic?
> Or, what's the best way to update DNS entries to point to a
> master.neocluster.company.com vs. slave.neocluster.company.com or such?
>
> Thanks
> Dave
>
>
> Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 11:12
neocluster.company.com vs. slave.neocluster.company.com or such?
Thanks
Dave
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 11:12:05 +0300
From: Tuure Laurinolli
Subject: Re: [Neo4j] HA consistency
To: Neo4j user discussions
Message-ID: <4d3381ef-89dc-402f-9efe-77d72131e...@portalify.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; cha
On Aug 19, 2011, at 07:57 , David Rader wrote:
> It looks like the HA implementation is for eventual consistency, tunable by
> how often a slave polls the master for updates from other nodes.
>
> With a load balanced cluster, is the best practice to simply use sticky
> sessions on clients to e
It looks like the HA implementation is for eventual consistency, tunable by how
often a slave polls the master for updates from other nodes.
With a load balanced cluster, is the best practice to simply use sticky
sessions on clients to ensure that immediate reads of updated data are served
by t
5 matches
Mail list logo