On 10/2/20 12:11 AM, William Brown wrote:
On 1 Oct 2020, at 20:27, Eugen Lamers <eugen.lam...@br-automation.com> wrote:
Hi,
we want to setup a Multi Master Replication that represents a scenario with several
mobile environments which need to replicate with some immobile server from time to time.
Is it possible - and reasonable - to group the servers of a mobile environment together
to a kind of sub-level MMR which replicates with the higher level MMR of the immobile
environment. This replication between the different "levels" would be triggered
somehow externally, because there would not always be a (sufficient) connection between
them.
This would represent some kind of combination of MMR and cascading replication.
Is there someone with experience with such kind of scenarios?
I haven't heard of such a scenario but I'd ask "what are you trying to achieve"
rather than commenting on the design too much.
An early issue you will hit is that replication is *push* based, so the "immobile" servers need to
be continually updated to know where the "mobile" server is in order to know how to contact it.
It's not "pull" based where the moving server could always access the static server.
Additionally, because it's "push" based, the sending server sets the schedule of when to replicate. Certainly, there is
a window of validity where a server can be "caugh up" (the changelog max age parameter is how long a server can be
disconnected and still replicated to later to "update" it). Again, if this were "pull" based, the mobile
server could "choose" when to recieve it's update.
But saying this, I think you have a problem space in mind, and while this may
be a solution, knowing more about the challenge you want to solve may help us
give better advice about how to configure your topology and potentially the
integrating applications.
Thanks,
My understanding is that some hosts may get temporary offline (mobile)
while others are always online (immobile). Replication can manage with
hosts being online-offline. With limitations how long the hosts are
offline (by default a host should not be offline more than 7 days) and
on the update rate if a host an not the capacity (#received updates) to
catch up.
regards
theirry
—
Sincerely,
William Brown
Senior Software Engineer, 389 Directory Server
SUSE Labs, Australia
_______________________________________________
389-users mailing list -- 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to 389-users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org
_______________________________________________
389-users mailing list -- 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to 389-users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org
