Andy Doan <[email protected]> writes: > On 01/28/2013 03:31 PM, Michael Hudson-Doyle wrote: >>> >Thoughts? Am I solving the wrong problem? >> Well. The thing that occurs to me is that what we are doing here is >> building a system that aims to be available for writes in the face of >> network partitions, and other people have already built systems that >> have this property -- it is basically the whole principle behind >> Amazon's famous dynamo db [1] and the systems it inspired like Riak and >> Cassandra. It seems unlikely that we'd do a better job than them. > > time to read your article below.
To be fair, we're pretty unlikely to build anything on this sort of technology before the outager we're being notified of :-) >> One thing that I don't completely understand how to replicate if we have >> a simple job-accepting scheduler in the cloud is the sanity check about >> the submitting user being able to submit results to the stream specified >> in the job -- or even if token provided while submitting the job is >> valid, come to think of it! > > I thought about this before my original email and decided to not mention > this issue. :) > However, my thinking was that we might need to add a new > state to a job called something like "REJECTED". Now normally, we just > reject a request before it ever becomes a job. However, in this offline > mode, we could wait to reject the job until we came back online and were > able to do the proper checks. Yeah, that could work. Still not sure if we'll get this done before the outage though... Cheers, mwh _______________________________________________ linaro-validation mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-validation
