[mythtv-users] How do master and slave backends divide up work?

[Phil Bridges]

On Jan 4, 2008 9:32 AM, Brad DerManouelian <myth at dermanouelian.com> wrote:
> On Jan 3, 2008, at 11:48 PM, Yeechang Lee wrote:
>
> > I have two backends. The master backend has two tuners. The slave
> > backend has two tuners. The database runs on the slave backend. Both
> > backends have equivalent access to the two arrays where recordings go
> > to.
> >
> > When one of the the slave backend's tuners is in action, how should I
> > envision the division of labor?
> >
> > a) Slave backend writes recording to disk; master backend updates
> >   recordedseek and other database tables
> > b) Slave backend writes recording and also updates database
> > c) Each bit of the recording is sent over the network to the master
> >   backend, which handles both the writing and database-updating; the
> >   slave backend is only used as a physical connection point for the
> >   tuner
> >
> > I'm pretty sure c) isn't the case, but is it a), b), or something
> > else?
>
> I think it's b since I've had my master backend go down while my slave
> was recording and it didn't have a negative effect on the slave's
> recording. master tells slave, "here, record this." and the slave
> happily does it until it's done and reports back to the master saying,
> "all done." Well, maybe not happily since it is a "slave", but you get
> the idea. :)

What happens to the database update if the master backend is down?