Each of the DB boxes would have a different login to the same hostname, so in that respect they would be separate. Is that good enough?
On Jun 27, 11:06 am, "Jamis Buck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If each of those DB boxes are separate, you could put :primary => true > on each of them, since each is a primary database server. You would > only omit :primary => true for db servers that are not primary (e.g., > slaves, which replicate from some primary server). > > - Jamis > > On 6/27/07, dbalatero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I have many clients that I am deploying a single application to, using > > cap2: > > > Example deploy.rb setup, with 3 clients on one box: > > --------------- > > role :web, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > > role :web, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > > role :web, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > > > role :app, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > > role :app, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > > role :app, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > > > role :db, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]", :primary => true > > role :db, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > > role :db, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > > > My question is regarding the :db tasks that run. I know that > > deploy:migrate will only run against a db server with :primary => > > true. Does that mean in the example above, when I try to run > > deploy:cold for [EMAIL PROTECTED], I will get a failure notice? I > > suspect it does. If so, is there a better way to manage a lot of > > clients' roles so everything works seamlessly? > > > Thanks! > > David Balatero --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/capistrano -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
