On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 3:36 PM, Dimitri Maziuk <[email protected]> wrote: > Serge Dubrouski wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 2:56 PM, Dimitri Maziuk <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> Serge Dubrouski wrote: >>>> Why not to use ldap syncrepl feature instead of DRBD? >>> The problem with syncrepl is not the replication, it's the timeouts in >>> the failover. As in you type "ls -l", your computer freezes for 5 minutes. >> >> With syncrepl you don't need a shared storage, so you can run LDAP as a >> clone. > > What I mean is, with syncrepl you're looking at 2 active ldap servers. > > If you have 2 active ldap servers, the usual default is 2 minutes until > your system gives up on one and tries to talk to the other. This takes > place in response to any user action that involves uid, gid, or whatever > else you my be storing in ldap. (E.g. "ls -l" needs to map uids to > names.) The action is blocking, the shell freezes.
But you still can have just 1 IP associated with a node that has LDAP up. Or you can have an IP with load balancer and health monitor. It's all design issues. > > As opposed to a cluster that monitors status of ldap service and fails > over if there's a problem: the only way hb_takeover takes 2 minutes is > if your drbd's developed split brain. And if you're lucky, it failed > over before you typed "ls -l". > > Dima > -- > Dimitri Maziuk > Programmer/sysadmin > BioMagResBank, UW-Madison -- http://www.bmrb.wisc.edu > _______________________________________________ > Linux-HA mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha > See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems > -- Serge Dubrouski. _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
