master - master? Do you mean active - active ?
replace master and slave with active and passive. On Nov 25, 2014, at 3:26 AM, Misty Stanley-Jones <[email protected]> wrote: > 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
