Frode Nordahl wrote:
On 16. okt. 2006, at 12.08, Buchan Milne wrote:
On Monday 16 October 2006 09:56, Frode Nordahl wrote:
On 16. okt. 2006, at 03.08, matthew sporleder wrote:
I also have a large database (my slapcat-ed file is over 4gb), but I
don't see how it's more reliable to shutdown a spare for one hour
while you scp versus four hours while you slapadd. What's the
difference? A minute's worth of replication to catch-up with?
I would have to take the slave down to do the slapcat as well,
No, you can slapcat while the slave is running.
Wouldn't that leave the LDIF in a inconsistent state? Or is slapcat
protected by a transaction?
All write operations in back-bdb/hdb are transactional, so they are
fully isolated. slapcat will only see consistent data. That was one of
the reasons for writing back-bdb in the first place...
Yes, if you're using sync-repl, there is no need for this. Take any valid
snapshot of the database, slapadd on the consumer, start it up, and it
will
catch up. Or, if you can wait a little bit longer, skip the whole
slapcat/slapadd step entirely.
--
-- Howard Chu
Chief Architect, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com
Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc
OpenLDAP Core Team http://www.openldap.org/project/
