>> The point of the shared area is to have a full remote backup, because >> the data is really important. The data is for archiving only, so if a >> user requests a archived document during the daytime, he can read the >> copy on the local server instead of reading it through the DSL line. >> Same is for fast storing the data that is available the next day on >> the other side after the sync. >> >> In this situation there is no real "master" location. Both locations >> are equal. > > I might be slow but that sounded like: "We have 1 site and want remote > backup" and if so 1 samba share and 1 rsync to remote backup site > without samba sounds like the solution you want. I guess I read it wrong > because that does not sound like the scenario described earlier.
No, sorry but maybe I have confused you and the list. Both locations have users and create files on the local server. Both locations have users who wish to read the documents created on the other side on the local server. There is no master in this situation. After the sync, both shares (one on each server) have to be equal. Only one location makes an additional backup to tape, but that is not important now. >> One question, can I sync both ways the same time or has the second >> sync wait for the first and if it has, how to time this? > > Depends on the setup: > > If Area1 is to be synced with Area2, it's no point in syncing Area2 > back to Area1 immediatly after, they will be identical. Well, no. > However, if you want to sync Area1 on BoxX to Area3 on BoxY and Area2 on > BoxY to Area4 on BoxX, then the jobs can run at the same time, since > they do not touch any of the others' areas: > > Box1:/home/share1 -> Box2:/home/backup1 > Box2:/home/share2 -> Box1:/home/backup2 > > The only issue will be the link speed. So timing has to be done I guess. -- Ariën Huisken Xilay Software _______________________________________________ tsl-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.trustix.org/mailman/listinfo/tsl-discuss
