Making migrations common (and not scary)

Simo Sorce simo at
Tue Dec 3 14:45:04 UTC 2013

On Wed, 2013-11-27 at 02:34 +1000, David Timothy Strauss wrote:
> There are two primary parts to any service: configuration and state.
> Configuration is, more or less, straightforward with the limitations
> you've mentioned.
> State is the complex one. I've worked with all the following
> relationships of state between servers:
>  (a) Replication (master/slave and ring-based)
>  (b) Serialization/archive for backup purposes
>  (c) Serialization/archive for server migration
>  (d) Serialization/archive for replica-bootstrapping purposes (often a
> special case of b or c)
> This is based on work with Cassandra, Redis, MariaDB, Solr,
> PostgreSQL, and I'm sure a few others. It would be really neat for our
> featured roles to come pre-packaged with consistent access to
> facilities like these.
> I see this potentially happening in several stages:
>  (1) Dump and load for configuration and state. Support using the
> archive for backup or server-migration purposes.
>  (2) Support replica creation, including whatever's required to
> bootstrap replicas and having a secure relationship between the
> servers.
>  (3) Use replicas as the server migration facility. At my company, we
> call this "mutiny." It's where a replica gets created, caught up, and
> then takes over the master role (however necessary).
>  (4) Support HA tools using replicas for fail-over.
> Some of these facilities may be free with container tools like Docker.

Are you doing these "replicas" despite what the tools offer ? Or do you
integrate with them ?

I am fairly familiar with LDAP replication for example, and that will
work only with the cooperation of the old and new LDAP servers.


Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York

More information about the server mailing list