[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: [JunkMail] Re: syncrepl with more that one database

To: Howard Chu <hyc@symas.com>
Subject: Re: [JunkMail] Re: syncrepl with more that one database
From: Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah@zimbra.com>
Date: Sat, 09 Feb 2008 11:32:46 -0800
Cc: James Hartley <james.hartley@gmail.com>, openldap-software@openldap.org
Content-disposition: inline
In-reply-to: <47ADF4C9.7090205@symas.com>
References: <8217e8cc0802081659g357f7d37wee1d12126bd5f7bc@mail.gmail.com> <AE42E7A7314BC1EB169EBD96@STONEKING-LM.CORP.YAHOO.COM> <8217e8cc0802090927m79147bb0p7fd20d07820e399f@mail.gmail.com> <5EA20DC27CD7E55F6E7C40C6@[192.168.1.196]> <47ADF4C9.7090205@symas.com>

--On Saturday, February 09, 2008 10:45 AM -0800 Howard Chu <hyc@symas.com> wrote:

They need to be unique per *server*, not per database.

Oh, hm... I thought it was for helping identify a given syncrepl instance in a server with multiple DBs. Certainly in 2.3, you could use the same rid for syncrepl across multiple servers without issue. Is this a change for 2.4?

--Quanah

--

Quanah Gibson-Mount
Principal Software Engineer
Zimbra, Inc
--------------------
Zimbra ::  the leader in open source messaging and collaboration

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [JunkMail] Re: syncrepl with more that one database
  - From: Howard Chu <hyc@symas.com>

References:
- syncrepl with more that one database
  - From: "James Hartley" <james.hartley@gmail.com>
- Re: syncrepl with more that one database
  - From: Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah@zimbra.com>
- Re: syncrepl with more that one database
  - From: Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah@zimbra.com>
- Re: [JunkMail] Re: syncrepl with more that one database
  - From: Howard Chu <hyc@symas.com>

Prev by Date: Re: syncrepl with more that one database
Next by Date: Re: [JunkMail] Re: syncrepl with more that one database
Index(es):
- Chronological
- Thread