Re: Replication VS copying the master DB

["matthew sporleder" <msporleder@gmail.com>]

You should just be able to copy the files over if the configs are the same.

On 2/26/06, Krishna Sivaramapuram <krishna@everyone.net> wrote:
>  I do see it is pretty fast... But my problem is the slave db may have
> gotten corrupted... I'm not too sure, if the data is intact in the slave to
> continue with the replication. So, I'm looking at the master DB... Of course
> I can do a slapcat from the master and then do a slapadd on the slave and
> then restart the replication from that point. But if I can just do a simple
> copy of the master db, it saves me a lot of time...
>
>  But I'm not sure, if it is proper to copy the master db to the slave...
>
>  Krish
>
>
>  matthew sporleder wrote:
>  If you're replicating with slurpd, it's pretty fast.
>
> On 2/26/06, Krishna Sivaramapuram <krishna@everyone.net> wrote:
>
>
>  We're using Openldap 2.3.19 with BDB 4.3.29.
>
> I had stopped replication for a few days to figure out some problems in
> our slave machine... Now I've a huge amount of data to replicate... I
> was wondering if I should just copy the entire db from the master to the
> slave. Is it recommended to copy the master DB to the slave? I know that
> we can copy slave db files to another slave. But I haven't seen anything
> that says we can copy the db files from the master to a slave. Is this
> safe or should I just the replica catch up?
>
> Krish
>
>
>
>