Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-11-24 at 08:52 -0600, Kasundra, Digant wrote: >> This is an interesting topic because way back in the day, when I was >> still considering whether or not >> to go with OpenLDAP, the single-master issue was the one sticking >> point with several at my >> organization. I'm here to tell you that we've been running OpenLDAP >> for a couple of years now and >> I've never had my master server fail yet. > > Yep, same here. We've been running OL in a production environment since > 1.2.x (I think) and we've never had an extended master outage (more than > a few minutes). I don't recall it ever happening since 2.2.x. > Master-Slave replication is sufficient for 99% of environments; IMHO > the impulse to want multi-master usually has to do with a lack of > experience with how robust modern DSAs are and how well master-slave > replication actually solves the problem. Every site where I've > installed LDAP wanted Multi-Master, no site has it, and everywhere is > happy with their LDAP service. Well, high availability does not come at no costs, and maybe the customer you had didn't needed 24*7 that much to pay for all necessary tools and techniques. Can you imagine a site of a global player where LDAP is mission critical? There are Multimaster site out there, and they even not small. Not based on OpenLDAP, but this is another story. bye Giovanni --- You are currently subscribed to [email protected] as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE as the SUBJECT of the message.
