Re: Replication errors with slurpd and ppolicy

[Pierangelo Masarati <ando@sys-net.it>]

Gavin Henry wrote:

> > yes, but according to [1] and other sources the current implementation of
> > refreshAndPersist is not a pure push solution. It's still the slave that
> > initiates the connection. To me it looked as I'd have to wait for 2.4.
> >
> > Correct me if I'm wrong as I might misinterpret the docs, however. Have
> > you tested this and confirmed it works?
>
> No, you are right. I misunderstood your requirement for a push based
> solution.

I need to check, but what 2.4 does is provide a facility for push-like 
sync-replication; however, the latest 2.3 should allow to proxy syncrepl 
by means of a regular proxy.  Namely, what test045 does should be 
possible with 2.3 as well, at the cost of an extra instance of slapd for 
proxying, while what test048 does requires something specific to 2.4.

Again: this needs to be checked, since 2.3 might still miss some details.


p.