Re: Repository failover

[Mahantesh M Vantmuri]

Mark D. Baushke wrote:

> [...]
> Or, you can just specify the remote repository with the -d argument to
> cvs.
Yes, one can do that also.

> In addition, if you use the CVS_LOCAL_BRANCH_NUM patch that has been
> committed to the cvshome main trunk (already available for various of
> the *BSD versions of cvs), you can create a local development area
> branch that the CVSup will not touch, this allows you to develop a
> feature 'locally' and then when you have tested it and are ready for it
> to be part of the main repository, merge it into the main trunk and
> commit using the -d trick.
I think this patch eases such backup repos. We have done this on some 
other servers.
Currently working towards applying it to production servers.

> Hmmm... It sounds tricky to know when to stop your CVSup activities
> unless you just lose connectivity to the main repository.
Right, this is little bit tricky. One has to stop CVSup activities once 
you lose connectivity to main repository.
But  by contantly monitoring main repository, we can decide when to stop 
CVSup activities on main repo.

> [...]
> I think you would be better off to keep your main repository as the
> primary and have the secondary 'backup' cvs servers available for some
> local CVS_LOCAL_BRANCH_NUM work until the main repository is back
> on-line.
I think that is better  solution.
Cheers.
Mahantesh.