Brad Nicholson <bnichols at ca.afilias.info> writes:
> On Thu, 2008-11-20 at 17:00 -0800, Richard Yen wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> Wondering if it's okay to drop listen entries (in an effort to sculpt  
>> my cluster).  I have a very small cluster that needs to replicate  
>> quickly, but there are 15 or so nodes, so all the cross talk across  
>> the network (sync_interval == 500) is generating a lot of load.
>> 
>> I know that in the past, STORE PATH was modified to imply a STORE  
>> LISTEN as well.  As a result, it looks like the sl_listen table  
>> contains entries for nodes that the local node doesn't need to listen  
>> to.  Furthermore, since the data set is very small (on the order of <  
>> 100MB), we don't anticipate ever needing to fail over or switch  
>> provider.
>> 
>> Would doing DROP LISTEN on the "unnecessary" nodes create any  
>> undesirable side effects?
>
> You should drop the uneeded paths.  The listen entries will be reshaped
> accordingly.

I mirror Brad's sentiment.

If you drop unnecessary paths (e.g. - run DROP PATH), *that* is the
better way to reduce the number of listen entries.
-- 
(reverse (concatenate 'string "ofni.sailifa.ac" "@" "enworbbc"))
<http://dba2.int.libertyrms.com/>
Christopher Browne
(416) 673-4124 (land)