On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 6:14 AM, Jason Rutherglen <jason.rutherg...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Yes. I'd highly recommend using the Java replication though. > > Is there a reason? I understand it's new etc, however I think one > issue with it is it's somewhat non-native access to the filesystem. > Can you illustrate a real world advantage other than the enhanced > admin screens? Complexity is the main problem w/ rsync based replication. you have to manage so many processes and monitor them separately. The other problem is managing snapshots. These snapshots need to be cleaned up every now and then. You do not have enough info on what is heppening/happened > > On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 11:13 PM, Shalin Shekhar Mangar > <shalinman...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 11:48 AM, Jason Rutherglen < >> jason.rutherg...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> If I've got multiple cores on a server, I guess I need multiple >>> rsyncd's running (if using the shell scripts)? >>> >> >> Yes. I'd highly recommend using the Java replication though. >> >> -- >> Regards, >> Shalin Shekhar Mangar. >> >
-- ----------------------------------------------------- Noble Paul | Systems Architect| AOL | http://aol.com
