Changed the thread subject ...

Marius

On Aug 22, 6:17 pm, "marius d." <[email protected]> wrote:
> Great thing Dave.
>
> Roughly having a bound function f that user provided say in an
> ajaxButton call.The function f may hold references to other functions,
> session/request-vars,  references to the snippets instances etc. One
> condition is that every object in the graph should be serializable and
> that is beyond our control (but more on the programmer's control). Of
> course for the function f to be correctly applied on any node, the
> whole object graph should be replicated among cluster nodes).
>
> Now assuming that we can serialize any function/object on the wire
> there is still one thing to solve.  As you know LiftSession and
> HTTPSession are not the same things. a LiftSession is linked to a
> HTTPSession so we'd probably need to replicate both? Systems like stax
> have their own way to make a HTTPSession available to any cluster node
> AFAIK by saving it into a database. Into such environments I'm not
> such if we know the actual machines identity andif we would have built
> our own replication system in a clustered env. that would probably not
> work ... so a node to node replication system may not be possible in
> stax like environments but would certainly work on other models. Still
> persisting a LiftSession in DB shoud and sounds like it is more
> environment agnostic.
>
> In a glance node-to-node session replication sounds to be a little
> more efficient  that DB session store we should probably keep an eye
> on both models. Other model that could be to lazily replicate sessions
> across cluster nodes such as:
>
> 1. Upon a request Node A advertises to other nodes that it hods the
> last state for session X
> 2. Upon a subsequent call that hits node B it won;t have the session
> but it would know where the session exist a fetch the state from that
> node
> 3. Node Node B advertises that it has the last state for session X
>
> ... Such model is not very fail over proof as at a given point in time
> different versions of the session state which may or may not enough.
>
> The most consistent model seems to be to store the session context
> into a centralized session store ... but that would induce a single
> point of failure unless the session store itself is redundant.
>
> Last but not the least Java serialization is sub-optimal but I'm not
> sure how many alternatives we'd have in order to make sure that we
> have a consistent reference graph that can be represented on the
> wire..
>
> Br's,
> Marius
>
> On Aug 22, 5:25 pm, David Pollak <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 2:31 AM, marius d. <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > Greg/Viktor,
>
> > > We could meet and discuss using whatever means (skype, chat, mail
> > > etc.) and brainstorm what can we do about this. Even though I like a
> > > lot sticky sessions idiom it is not enough and I think we do have a
> > > consensus here :) ... of course any committer is more then welcome to
> > > participate.
>
> > On the substance point (I've moved this to the Lift list), we may want to
> > use some aspecty thing to analyze the potential serializability of functions
> > that are added to the LiftSession.  I'm betting there's no actual barrier to
> > serializing stuff in the normal case except when things refer to the
> > HttpServletRequest (which refers to input/output streams).  If we could get
> > an actual analysis, we could develop a better serialization/session moving
> > strategy.
>
> > > Br's,
> > > Marius
>
> > > On Aug 22, 12:15 am, Viktor Klang wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 11:12 PM, Meredith Gregory
>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > Marius,
>
> > >  i really do want to go over lift's ability to
> > > > > work in vendor supplied clustering solutions.
>
> > > > We could do a Skype conf when you're feeling better, Greg.
>
> > --
> > Lift, the simply functional web frameworkhttp://liftweb.net
> > Beginning Scalahttp://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890
> > Follow me:http://twitter.com/dpp
> > Git some:http://github.com/dpp
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Lift" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to