On 10/11/07, Guillaume Nodet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I was thinking that ldap may be handy for the registry, but hopefully
> Chris will join the discussion at this point... Though camel does
> not support ldap (yet).
This was exactly the road I started going down in order to solve a
couple of problems:
1) Distributing a consistent configuration across groups of nodes
2) Providing for a central registry that is replicated to other
directory server instances
This would optionally require a master directory server with other
backup or slave servers in order to replicate the registry data. The
size of the network and the criticality of the data would determine if
you need to run slave servers or not.
The other thing I began thinking about was using the AMQ master/slave
functionality and just embedding the directory server in the master
and the slaves. This would mean less moving parts and we could make
any LDAP replications take place via AMQ transports.
> So your snippet would actually solve the heartbeat problem. But I'm
> not sure we can send the whole data at each heartbeat. I guess it
> depends how bit this data is, but if we have lots of services in the
> OSGi registry, it may not be very scalable. So we would have to
> default to send only updates or find another mechanism to send the
> data (the heartbeat could just contain the url of our container, and
> the data would be retrieved by another mechanism).
How about just sending the URL and a flag stating that there is an
update? If one of the other servers wants the update, then they can
poll that server's URL and a known topic for the actual data updates.
Bruce
--
perl -e 'print unpack("u30","D0G)[EMAIL
PROTECTED]&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D\!G;6%I;\"YC;VT*"
);'
Apache ActiveMQ - http://activemq.org/
Apache ServiceMix - http://servicemix.org/
Apache Geronimo - http://geronimo.apache.org/
Castor - http://castor.org/
