On Fri, 2007-03-30 at 13:44 +1000, Jake Anderson wrote: > > Perdition would solve the IMAP UID problem, but it doesn't help with the > > plain old auto_increment collisions... > > > > > Yeah thats what i was thinking, to me thats just part of multi master > replication.
This is *the* core issue of multimaster. There are decades of work on distributed lock management to figure out who gets to make what changes to which critical data structures. > Although... you wouldn't really need multi-master as each server really > is the "real deal" with all reads and writes being done on it. The > backup will only be used if the master is gone. It might still be an > idea to set it with the auto_increment value (in mysql at least, i don't > know about postgres), just incase you get a "split brain" situation. "The backup will only be used if the master is gone." is *the* core issue! Split brain is a very real, very serious problem. STOMITH stands for "Shoot The Other Man In The Head" and involves physically cutting power to the other machine to prevent a split brain. In other words, the problem is serious enough that otherwise sane people consider it a lesser risk to yank the power than allow a split brain. > > If we combined Perdition with per-server auto_increment id windows, then > > I think we'd be onto something! > > > > Aaron > Thats what i was thinking. > postfix can direct mail to a host based on a database lookup. Can it? Point me to some docs and/or sample configs. If this can be made to work, then we really would have a single namespace horizontally scalable setup that we could recommend. Aaron _______________________________________________ DBmail mailing list [email protected] https://mailman.fastxs.nl/mailman/listinfo/dbmail
