On 4 June 2013 09:52, Bela Ban <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 6/4/13 10:44 AM, Sanne Grinovero wrote: > >>> I think we would hit problems where the JPA EE container/subsystem side >>> interacts with the Infinispan (system) module (probably EJB3 code as >>> well.) >> >> >> Right, I realize that, but there might be a solution coming we call >> "grafting" JGRP-1613 > > > > Good you used the conditional tense. I looked into this and I'm currently > not convinced this will be needed, or can be added to JGroups. Let's discuss > this further at Red Hat Summit next week.
Right, but even if that where not coming I don't think that should stop users from being able to start an independent JGroups stack in the scope of their application (at their risk). > > > >> basically it should expose virtually independent channels so that >> multiple services >> needing an "owned" channel can use them without conflicts, but still >> sharing >> some protocols. So in the specific case of this discussion, people could >> reuse the ports, making it easier to configure and possibly faster to >> boot, but also >> reuse the cluster topology definition and failure detection, making it >> less awkward to use as in such >> a case you really don't want the topology from the AS to be out of sync >> with the >> topology used by some application cache. >> >> Sanne > > > -- > Bela Ban, JGroups lead (http://www.jgroups.org) _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
