two primarys instead?

[Kevin Darcy]

Jim Reid wrote:

> >>>>> "Mathias" =3D=3D Mathias K=F6rber <mathias at koerber.org> writes:
>
>     Mathias> Why? There should be no problem with having two
>     Mathias> primaries, as long as both have the same copy of the
>     Mathias> original zonefile.
>
> And nobody does dynamic updates. And manual updates of the zone files
> are only ever done in the one place.

Jim, the original poster was talking about a MySQL database being the
definitive source of the data and simply propagating that data out
periodicially to the DNS servers. In that case, I can't see why there
would need to be any Dynamic Updates to the nameservers or manual
changes to the zonefiles. So having multiple primaries shouldn't be a
problem -- in data terms, they're basically just gateways to the
MySQL database. What's the alternative? Propagate from MySQL to one
primary master, and then have the other nameservers do zone
transfers? Yuck. Now you're dealing with multiple replication protocols,
more complexity, and (most likely) unnecessary propagation delays.


- Kevin