Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> Wouldn't the server's themselves be operating off of some version number
> so they can synchronize their own state?
> It would seem that this would be the same version number.

Yeah...actually a hash of the server list seemed to be a way to
calculate a version number across servers, so its in-sync based on the
cluster state.  But Mr Blevins talked me out of this ;-)

> 
> On Jun 11, 2007, at 5:04 PM, Jeff Genender wrote:
> 
>> Ok...so now that we have passed the TCK...I can get back and concentrate
>> on some fun stuff, so I wanted to bring up the old discussion again of
>> getting a clustering API pinned up on OpenEJB.  The whole idea on this
>> is to allow different clustering components to tie into the product.
>>
>> Before I stopped and did TCK testing, I got as far as adding the ability
>> to handle multiple URLs in the client/server to allow for failover.
>>
>> Now that I am getting back to the meat of the design here, I wanted to
>> go over at a high level of the direction I am taking this.
>>
>> 1) The client need to get an initial list of servers in the cluster.  I
>> assume this can occur during the first initial context handshake.
>>
>> 2) A version number is applied and sent along with the list.
>>
>> 3) Every time the client speaks to the server is sends along the version
>> number.  If the version is different, the server sends down a new list,
>> along with the new version number.
>>
>> 4) The server updates the list only when the servers in the cluster have
>> changed.
>>
>> Thoughts and comments?
>>
>> Jeff
>>

Reply via email to