[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
Re: Failing consumers over to second mirror master provider
- To: Tim <tim@yetanother.net>
- Subject: Re: Failing consumers over to second mirror master provider
- From: Frank Swasey <Frank.Swasey@uvm.edu>
- Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2017 09:37:56 -0400 (EDT)
- Cc: openldap-technical@openldap.org
- In-reply-to: <CAPkXO3XJcqS8q7phRquEMU+2_F7nvENda=BAyhqT3zsU1WZftg@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <CAPkXO3XJcqS8q7phRquEMU+2_F7nvENda=BAyhqT3zsU1WZftg@mail.gmail.com>
- User-agent: Alpine 2.21 (OSX 202 2017-01-01)
Today at 7:43am, Tim wrote:
I realise that the RID has to be unique - so am I right in thinking that
there is no way for the failover to seamless, and replication must be
re-established by removing the existing syncrepl statement, on the
consumers, and re-adding it with the secondaries details?
Or am I missing a trick here as to how the process could be smoother?
You are missing the point.
You say you have a load balancer that decides which of your MMR partners
should receive the traffic. Your consumers should be configured in such
a way that both MMR partners will accept the connection.
For example...
My MMR partners are ldap7p and ldap7q. The load balanced VIP is
ldap7rw. My consumers are set up with unique RIDs (the RID is unique
for each consumer) and their provider is ldap7rw. It does not matter
whether the load balancer sends the traffic to ldap7p or ldap7q - the
consumer is talking to ldap7rw.
--
Frank Swasey | http://www.uvm.edu/~fcs
Sr Systems Administrator | Always remember: You are UNIQUE,
University of Vermont | just like everyone else.
"I am not young enough to know everything." - Oscar Wilde (1854-1900)