Manu George wrote:
> As per what I understood if one of the servers are down then the
> client will call the next one in the list which would send it a new id
> after which all calls will be to that one. 

You are assuming no policy for how a client chooses a server and that
its linear.  Consider it random and this issue goes away.

> But in order to decide
> which server to pick based on the load balancing strategy used I think
> we may need more information to be passed to the client. Once this
> discussion is finished i think we should put this in a wiki page as it
> provides good insights on clustering and the logic used. I can
> probably do that if no one else wants it :)
> 
> Regards
> Manu
> 
> On 6/14/07, Paulo Lopes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> The idea of id download on the first connection doesn't seem nice to
>> me. Assume the following scenario:
>>
>> you have a cluster of 3 servers, and the 3 are aware of the other by
>> their internal configuration. (no discovery inside the cluster). The
>> client receives the list of 3 servers and now has to decide which one
>> to connect. It is clear here that the client needs to know some more
>> about the server to decide which one to pick in order to share the
>> load balancing in the cluster, more there is no way for the client to
>> know if one of the servers is down and if it is that server is removed
>> from the list and never connected again during that request.
>>
>> My idea is that perhaps we would better have a small extra server that
>> i will call a service dispatcher, that is the central point for the
>> cluster. no need to change the openejb code each server still works in
>> a isolated way. The SD would have the configurations of where the
>> openejb nodes are in the cluster and their status (up/down).
>>
>> The clients would then connect to the SD and the SD would query the
>> list of servers, and forward to the next available one. Metrics could
>> be gathered from the SD such as time between query and response from
>> OEJB making a simple (not so accurate) load balancer system.
>>
>> Paulo
>>

Reply via email to