> On Nov 25, 2014, at 11:09 AM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <[email protected]> wrote: > > "A master can be > slave too, and a slave a master, and cycles are allowed" since with just > that you can build everything else.
+1 > On Nov 25, 2014, at 11:09 AM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 8:29 PM, lars hofhansl <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hmm... From that angle all we really have is master-slave replication, >> without limit as how it can be setup.A master can be slave too, and a slave >> a master, and cycles are allowed. >> I find "cyclical replication" more confusing than "master-master" >> (although it's true that master-master is strictly a subset of cyclical - >> just a cycle of two). > > I agree with that. > > >> We might want to scrap all the terms and just state (hopefully a bit >> nicer) what I tried to say in the first two sentences above. > > One thing about "master-master" is that some audiences will get it right > away, for example folks coming from the MySQL world, but maybe we want to > skip using it in our doc and just say what you wrote above "A master can be > slave too, and a slave a master, and cycles are allowed" since with just > that you can build everything else. > > >> -- Lars >> >> From: Misty Stanley-Jones <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Sent: Monday, November 24, 2014 7:26 PM >> Subject: Replication terminology "master-master" >> >> Hi all, >> >> I think "master-master" is a term that should be re-thought. It is not >> really a "type" of replication, but refers to a characteristic of a >> cluster, specifically a cluster which participates in multiple clusters >> with different roles -- it is a slave in one cluster and a master in >> another cluster. I think with the current terminology, people confuse it >> with "cyclical" replication, in which two clusters replicate to each other, >> and eventually each has all the data from both. >> >> Since master-master in this sense is really not a type of replication, I >> think we should just scrap it. You can have master-slave replication or >> cyclical replication, or a combination. With master-slave replication, a >> cluster can fulfill both roles at the same time, as long as it is in >> different clusters. This is easy to understand as a sort of recursive >> cascade. >> >> Am I explaining it right, and what do you guys think about changing our >> terminology? >> >> Thanks, >> Misty >> >> >> >>
