[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
Re: Failover Failure Advice
Hello Anton,
I suggest you'd seriously take a dive into the earlier suggestion I did
(see below).
When you're worried about to much network traffic (VRRP can make quite
some noise), you can put the two "real" LDAP-servers into a dedicated
VLAN, or use a secundary interface on both LDAP-machines and let 'm talk
to each other over a crosscable.
Suggestion: start with making a well working Mirror mode replication on
two LDAP-servers.
If that runs OK, install "some Virtual IP" software en make that work.
For the LDAP-clients there's nothing else to do then make them point to
the Virtual (or floating) IP.
Regards, Kuba
On Wed, 2011-01-26 at 13:40 -0800, Anton Chu wrote:
> I currently have a Master/Slave Failover setup and I'm planning to
> deploy 100 ldap clients soon. I'm thinking about installing a Slave
> LDAP Server in all my ldap clients. I'm sure this will bog down the
> network but can I program syncrepl to be less chatty between master
> and slave? I'm planning to point 60 of my clients to the master while
> the rest will point to the slave. Your thoughts?
>
> Kindest regards,
> Anton
>
> On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 3:22 PM, jekvb <jekvb@gmx.co.uk> wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-01-18 at 14:43 -0800, Anton Chu wrote:
>
>
> > I've setup a master and slave ldap service for failover;
>
>
> My failover construction is a bit different, but it works
> quite nicely,
> so I 'd like to share this.
> For a simple and reliable failover I have two LDAP servers in
> Mirror
> mode with Keepalived on top of it. This is based on having one
> virtual
> IP for both machines. When the one LDAP server (master) that
> has the IP,
> fails, all read & write operations are directed to the backup
> server.
> When the failed LDAP server comes up again it takes over the
> IP again
> and SyncRepl on the slave takes care of updating the master.
>
>
> Best regards, Kuba
>
>