On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Hiranya Jayathilaka <[email protected]>wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 4:58 PM, Dimuthu Leelarathne <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 4:54 PM, Hiranya Jayathilaka <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 4:50 PM, Dimuthu Leelarathne 
>>> <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 4:47 PM, Hiranya Jayathilaka 
>>>> <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Dimuthu Leelarathne <
>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 4:01 PM, Hiranya Jayathilaka <
>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Afkham Azeez <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So, in the registry based approach in Synapse/ESB, how was the
>>>>>>>> cluster synchronization problem solved? If a policy is changed in one 
>>>>>>>> node,
>>>>>>>> how does that get reflected on the rest of the nodes?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  Policies are stored in config registry. In a cluster we share the
>>>>>>> config registry. So all ESB nodes see the same set of policies.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Besides in many real world scenarios people use custom policies. So
>>>>>>> for them this is not a problem at all. In such cases they have the 
>>>>>>> policies
>>>>>>> in a shared governance registry.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes this will work. But I think we need a better approach. We are
>>>>>> talking about the problem of sharing the governance space of the registry
>>>>>> across all service cluster. This move forces us to step into the opposite
>>>>>> direction, i.e. towards more centralization rather than decentralization.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> How come having a shared governance registry is a decentralized
>>>>> approach? And what is the problem with sharing registry across multiple
>>>>> nodes?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What I meant was sharing config registry among a cluster is much better
>>>> approach than using governance registry. When we start putting things that
>>>> should be shared on a cluster only, in governance registry instead of a
>>>> config registry, we are moving in the opposite direction of what we want to
>>>> achieve.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Ok. Normal practice for setting up a product cluster (eg: an ESB
>>> cluster) is to have a shared config registry and store all cluster-wide
>>> shareable resources in the config registry. So in that case what do we need
>>> a better approach for?
>>>
>>
>> That is the better approach instead of governance registry. I said that
>> because one of the previous mails were talking about using gov registry.
>>
>
> Oh ok :)
>
> I brought up governance registry because sometimes you have multiple
> product clusters (eg: ESB cluster + AS cluster) and you might want to have
> a particular policy file available for all of them. For an example think of
> a scenario where you apply one security policy on all proxy services in ESB
> and all Axis2 services in AS. Right now our solution to that is to have a
> shared governance registry, if I'm not mistaken.
>
>
Yes, this is the recommended registry sharing approach as explained under
"Strategy D" of [1]

[1]
http://wso2.org/library/tutorials/2010/04/sharing-registry-space-across-multiple-product-instances
_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev

Reply via email to