Hmm, again we have stopped the discussion :). Lets get it started again.
So can we all come to some agreement (with more discussion) on which direction we might be taking !!
Like merging ActiveCluster and WADI or getting best of both worlds ?
And also if we can define expectations/requirments for what we like for the next possible release (1.01 or whatever) in terms of clustering would give folks like me more direction as to where we should concentrate on?
If we decide on a direction maybe a few of us can start on a few prototypes and see what works best for Geronimo.
Regards,
Rajith Attapattu.
On 1/5/06, Rajith Attapattu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Jules Gosnell [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 9:55 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: wadi-dev@incubator.apache.org ; dev@geronimo.apache.org
Subject: Re: [wadi-dev] Re: [Geronimo] Clustering
James Strachan wrote:
>
> 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.
>
???
well, maybe I'm thinking of the wrong piece of activecluster then ?
any piece of code could broadcast a packet... which piece of
activecluster's API are you suggesting here ?
we really are talking about just a remoting proxy which needs to find,
but not 'join' a cluster.
can you be more specific ?
Jules
> James
> -------
> http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
--
"Open Source is a self-assembling organism. You dangle a piece of
string into a super-saturated solution and a whole operating-system
crystallises out around it."
/**********************************
* Jules Gosnell
* Partner
* Core Developers Network (Europe)
*
* www.coredevelopers.net
*
* Open Source Training & Support.
**********************************/
