Would there be any problems running 4 primaries and no secondaries?

[Barry Margolin]

In article <38EE51CD.96107699 at daimlerchrysler.com>,
Kevin Darcy  <kcd at daimlerchrysler.com> wrote:
>Christopher wrote:
>
>> We now want to run 4 primary name servers and no secondaries all load
>> balanced off a switch and all 4 will be running off the same NetApp
>> array (14 disks) ... No zone transfers, and no second zonefile database
>> issues to worry about. does anyone see any drawbacks to this kind of a
>> setup?
>
>Question: How would all 4 masters know to reload a zone when you change it?

I'm guessing a cron job that periodically checks the file timestamps, or
maybe an ssh script that sends "ndc reload" commands to all the servers.

>Also, would you have any Single Points of Failure in the switch itself or in
>any of the components in the network path from any potential client to the
>switch?

Named only accesses the files when it's reloading or doing a zone
transfer.  So a network problem between the name servers and the file
server shouldn't have any effect on normal query responses.

-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar at genuity.net
Genuity, Burlington, MA
*** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups.
Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group.