On 19 Dec 2005, at 14:14, Jules Gosnell wrote:
James Strachan wrote:
On 19 Dec 2005, at 11:53, Jules Gosnell wrote:
, whether there is other suitable Geronimo or ASF-licensed code
available, or whether we will need to write our own WADI-
autodiscovery classes. The important thing is to impose as few
dependencies on the client as possible. The client side code
should literally be a few lines. Clients using clusters should
not suddenly find themselves sucking down e.g. the whole of
activemq, just to do a once off autodiscovery. Early versions of
WADI had its own autodiscovery code. If we need them, they could
be resuscitated.
There's no reason why you can't do a simple implementation of
ActiveCluster which doesn't use ActiveMQ - its just a simple API.
Sure - but I'm talking about the EJB-client side - where we just
want to throw across as thin a line as possible, in order to haul a
decent strength cable back. An EJB client would not need the
ActiveCluster API (I'm not thinking in terms of making EJB clients
fully fledged cluster members), but simply a way of locating the
cluster and requesting a membership snapshot of it.
Thats exactly what the ActiveCluster API is for :). Though by all
means come up with another API if you can think of a better way of
doing it.
This could be done by just broadcasting a query packet at a well
known multicast address and waiting for the first well-formed
response.
Sure - an *implementation* of ActiveCluster API could do exactly that.
James
-------
http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
