[Dnsmasq-discuss] A (possibly bad) idea: failover in dnsmasq

Vincent Cadet v_cadet at yahoo.fr
Sat May 26 10:24:51 BST 2012

> > This active-passive scheme shouldn't need any dnsmasq
> changes, and
> > arranging to monitor server instances and start a new
> one when an
> > existing one goes down is a solved problem: it's
> exactly what heartbeat
> > does.
> > 
> > Building a heartbeat harness to run dnsmasq
> active-passive and
> > replicated tyrant (or another database) sure looks like
> a useful thing
> > to try, IMHO.

What if there be a heartbeat link in dnsmasq through which the active dnsmasq would stream changes (or the whole block of data) to the passive instance along with keep-alive probes? Something similar to Postgres streaming replication in fact. An interruption in the stream for more than a programmed delay would then be interpreted as a fail-over request. The link would be a socket, serial link, whatever.


More information about the Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list