"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
> Unless I am missing something the catalog only needs information for its
> specific cluster. E.g; My Master is, I am master for.
I think the "cluster" here is composed of all and any server partaking
into the replication network, whatever its role and cascading level,
because we only support one master. As soon as the setup is replicated
too, you can edit the setup from the one true master and from nowhere
else, so the single authority must contain the whole setup.
Now that doesn't mean all lines in the setup couldn't refer to a
provider which could be different from the master in the case of
cascading.
What I don't understand is why the replication network topology can't
get serialized into a catalog?
Then again, assuming that a catalog ain't possible, I guess any file
based setup will mean manual syncing of the whole setup at all the
servers participating in the replication? If that's the case, I'll say
it again, it looks like a nightmare to admin and I'd much prefer having
a distributed setup, where any standby's setup is simple and directed to
a single remote node, its provider.
Please note also that such an arrangement doesn't preclude from having a
way to register the standbys (automatically please) and requiring some
action to enable the replication from their provider, and possibly from
the master. But as there's already the hba to setup, I'd think paranoid
sites are covered already.
Regards,
--
dim
