On 02/11/2011 01:51 PM, fddi wrote:
I understand you, but the advantage of having mysql backend is that
if one of the two servers dies, the other keeps running with up to
date informations, and can also be updated wit new informations. When
the other server comes up again it will automatically sync itself
using mysql replica mechanism. if I use file backend I have to
manually sync it, and how to keep tracks of modifications ?
for this I choose mysql backend
Two questions, how often do you anticipate one of the masters failing,
and how much data are you talking about? Generally the number of times a
server fails is going to be pretty small, if it's not, you've got bigger
problems.
If you're not talking about a huge amount of data here (and from what
you've described in previous posts, you're not) then you are fairly
dramatically over-architecting your solution here. Personally I think
David had a great idea in regards to using nsupdate to update both
masters at the same time. If you really think that one of them is going
to fail often enough to justify an automated solution than scripting
something that utilizes rsync shouldn't be too hard.
hth,
Doug
--
Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much.
-- OK Go
Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS.
Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/
_______________________________________________
bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
