That would be very helpful to define either clustering goals, and what/how to replicate.
Thank you! Etienne On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 5:23 PM, Alan Conway <[email protected]> wrote: > On 09/20/2010 11:05 AM, Kerry Bonin wrote: > On portability: I think it would not be difficult to abstract the C++ > cluster to run over a different virtual synchrony library. If there is such > a library on windows it would probably pay to make the existing code > portable rather than fork a completely new cluster solution. It would be > beneficial to have more people testing the same core cluster code rather > than spreading the effort over separate code bases, and very beneficial to > have more eyes on that code. > > I'm getting together some thoughts on how the C++ cluster architecture code > could be restructured for greater performance and maintainability which > might be of interest. The general idea is to replicate a smaller and more > clearly defined subset of broker state and to remove the need for identical > ordering of messages on replicated queues. I'll try to get something written > up this week. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation > Project: http://qpid.apache.org > Use/Interact: mailto:[email protected] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation Project: http://qpid.apache.org Use/Interact: mailto:[email protected]
