Jonathan Clarke wrote: > [email protected] wrote: >> Ah right. For the serverID code, we're doing a liberal match because anything >> that matches the current name:port is obviously the current server, and we >> want it to be identified as such. >> >> For syncrepl, we know full well that it may be the current server, but for >> whatever reason you may want to replicate against yourself anyway (e.g., >> against a different baseDN, etc...).
> Actually, this comes straight from test049 (config replication). With > multimaster config replication, it starts by replicating itself > (useless, but necessary for other masters). This problem doesn't appear > in the test case, since a variable ($URI1) is used for both the slapd -h > $URI1 option, and in the syncrepl provider=$URI1 LDIF. Otherwise it > would produce weird results. If you want a setup similar to test049, follow what it does. If you want to something else, do otherwise. There are valid reasons to point a syncrepl consumer at the same slapd (e.g., proxy syncrepl, automatic local backup/mirroring, rewriting a subtree of a main database, etc.). Using the exhaustive matching that serverID uses would preclude those cases from working. As usual, when you're configuring a server, you have to pay attention to what you're doing and what effect you want to accomplish. -- -- Howard Chu CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/ Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/
