Howard Chu writes:
Hallvard B Furuseth wrote:
Unless you have different servers for different purposes, which share _some_ data - e.g. a database with user/group info. Though then it may be about time to give up the idea of replicating config. It might only be feasible to replicate the config of the shared database anyway.
Indeed. Most of the cases you're talking about are cases where it makes no sense to talk about shared config.
I disagree with that, the configs can still be mostly identical. However:
Let's acknowledge that those cases exist, and are not the cases of interest here, and ignore them. If you want to have distinct settings on each server, then go manage them distinctly; there's nothing else to talk about there.
Absolutely. In particular since I'm not volunteering to implement it.
BTW, I can think of one other use of replicated config: Support. The site admin could do at least some config updates without having to log in on each server host. Your suffixmassage suggestion should be perfect for that.