Re: [389-users] Single Master, Multiple Slave with NO Configuration Server Question

[Rich Megginson]

Vince Tingey wrote:
>  Hi everyone,  I posted this last week but nobody replied.  I thought
> I 
>  would send it out there one more time as I'd really like to know what 
>  you experts think.  The documentation about what benefits using a 
>  configuration server gives you is lacking. 
It allows you to do centralized server management - manage all servers 
from a single console.

>  Just wondering if there are any problems I should be aware of if I 
>  want to setup a single master multiple slave scenario WITHOUT using 
>  the master as a configuration server and just replicating our 
>  directory database (not o=Netscape Root).  I'm ok having to connect to 
>  the slave admin servers individually instead of them all showing up in 
>  the console when I connect to the master admin server.  Are there any 
>  other drawbacks?  
No, not really,  If you don't want the centralized console,
then you 
don't have to use it.  Many Fedora DS users don't use the console/admin 
server at all and just manage everything directly with scripts and web 
based tools.
>  What are the benefits of using a configuration server in this scenario?
>
>  Thank you,
>  -- 
>
>  Vince                   |  Michael Smith Laboratories
>  IT Systems Coordinator  |  University of British Columbia
>    
>  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>  --
>  389 users mailing list
>  389-users(a)redhat.com
>  https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users
>