Ooh, option D sounds interesting! 'Call bridges can read/write to any database in a cluster at any time.' That could offer a lot of flexibility and redundancy. But I wonder if there are any trade-offs or potential issues with that approach.
Okay, let's start with option A. I don't think that's correct, as a full mesh connection between call bridges and databases might not be the most efficient or scalable approach.
Good point. Option C, where only one call bridge is configured per domain in a database cluster, might be a better solution. That way, you have redundancy at the domain level.
You're right. Option B sounds more plausible, where the call bridges only connect to a master database. That would provide a centralized point of control and management.
I agree. Option B, where call bridges only connect to the master database, seems like a more centralized approach. But I wonder if that could be a single point of failure?
Hmm, I'm not sure about that. Option C mentions something about only one call bridge per domain in a database cluster. That might be the way to go for a resilient and scalable deployment.
Okay, let's start with option A. Connecting call bridges to databases in full mesh sounds like it could work, but I'm not sure if that's the most efficient or resilient setup.
Myra
6 months agoMaybelle
6 months agoMyra
6 months agoMaybelle
7 months agoJanna
7 months agoMaybelle
7 months agoCarla
7 months agoJenise
7 months agoElly
7 months agoCarla
7 months agoElly
7 months agoClarinda
8 months agoCristal
8 months agoFrank
8 months agoClay
8 months agoIzetta
8 months agoDeeann
7 months agoAdelina
7 months agoKris
8 months agoFlorencia
8 months agoTonette
8 months agoTu
8 months agoGerald
8 months agoGerman
8 months agoWayne
8 months agoVal
8 months agoCarlton
8 months ago