Forum Discussion

Roman_80473's avatar
Icon for Nimbostratus rankNimbostratus
Jan 31, 2011

synchronize changes in ACTIVE/STANDBY environment

Hi folks,



Does anyone know how to synchronize changes in an ACTIVE/STANDBY environment? Do I need to make the changes to an active node first (add new pool w members, add new vserver, etc)? Then, synchronize changes with standby using smth like System::ConfigSync::synchronize_configuration(CONFIGSYNC_BASIC)? Is the sequence (active->standby) required?



Any help is appreciated.



7 Replies

  • The believe config sync action will push the configuration to the remote side. It shouldn't matter if you're on the standby system vs. the active: A push should be a push, regardless of the system state. That said, it's worth testing this in a lab or sandbox environment first to be sure.
  • Hi L4L7,



    Thanks for a feedback. I thought sequence matters, for updating standby unit first renders active one out of sync and inaccessible to traffic for a fraction of time. I will test and post back.





  • I normally make changes on the active unit and then sync to the peer. Doing it the other way requires a 'b config install' and a 'b load' on the active unit. I've seen a b load on an active unit affect traffic processing.



    So regardless of whether you're making the changes via the GUI or iControl, I'd try to avoid a config sync to the active unit.



  • Aaron,


    That makes sense, thanks for the post.


    p.s. how do I award the right answer on this forum?
  • A b load can most definitely affect traffic on a box that is processing traffic, so agree with the sequence that hoolio mentions. I must have misread the original question (if the active->standby sequence was a requirement, which it isn't). Thanks for the clarification.


  • I did get the info, thank you for your help, guys. I just recall on some forums, like OTN, members would actually ask to evaluate their helpfulness to score points.


  • DC doesn't really have that kind of feature (or perspective). I think the focus is more on sharing knowledge than scoring users.



    Thanks regardless though. I'm glad you figured out a solution that works for you.