= m. Th = wrote:

> Note that this can be done also on Windows (when the remote shadows will
> be implemented) and is blazingly fast (at 1Gbps is transparent) and,
> also, rock solid at crash tests (details available on request - remote
> shadows on Windows were tested on an experimental SS RC5 build for
> Windows). Perhaps a better approach is to have on the client the
> redirection engine. (On both servers the fbserver is running) Ie. in
> TIBODatabase.OnError do something like:

snip

>
> IMHO, this is much more simpler, faster, platform independent and
> doesn't introduce the side effects of changing the IP in the LAN.
>
> hth,
>
> m. th.

I personally wouldn't be real comfortable pushing the failover logic to
the client. What happens when two clients notice the master is dead and
try to initiate the failover at the same time? There's no reason you
couldn't have a 'special' client running on the slave server doing what
you suggest though.

This is just another reason I, too, would REALLY like to see the
restriction on databases on windows
CIFS shares removed, particular for windows embedded mode. My
application backs itself up every few transactions, and I'm willing to
take my life into my own hands for it, turn it on with a flag and a
really obnoxious comment in the firebird.conf if you have to.

What I am seeing from this thread is that there doesn't seem to be a lot
of interest in keeping classic viable for the long term, although Dmitry
did mention that R&D work towards clustered classic was happening... Is
it being documented anywhere?

--erik





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]