Perfect! Thanks guys - I was confusing syncRepl with other replication mechanisms I've had experience of and assumed that updates coming in via syncRepl would be blindly replayed to any connected consumers.
Just the push I needed in the right direction.
On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 3:09 PM, Quanah Gibson-Mount quanah@symas.com wrote:
--On Friday, September 08, 2017 10:37 AM -0400 Frank Swasey < Frank.Swasey@uvm.edu> wrote:
Today at 7:43am, Tim wrote:
I realise that the RID has to be unique - so am I right in thinking that
there is no way for the failover to seamless, and replication must be re-established by removing the existing syncrepl statement, on the consumers, and re-adding it with the secondaries details?
Or am I missing a trick here as to how the process could be smoother?
You are missing the point.
You say you have a load balancer that decides which of your MMR partners should receive the traffic. Your consumers should be configured in such a way that both MMR partners will accept the connection.
For example...
My MMR partners are ldap7p and ldap7q. The load balanced VIP is ldap7rw. My consumers are set up with unique RIDs (the RID is unique for each consumer) and their provider is ldap7rw. It does not matter whether the load balancer sends the traffic to ldap7p or ldap7q - the consumer is talking to ldap7rw.
Consumers can also be configured with > 1 syncrepl stanza, and simply talk to both masters at the same time. There is no need for them to be reconfigured at all.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount Product Architect Symas Corporation Packaged, certified, and supported LDAP solutions powered by OpenLDAP: http://www.symas.com