On Wed, 2008-03-26 at 10:32 -0500, David Teigland wrote: > > [1] Just to be clear, the meta-configuration idea is where a variety of > config files can be used to populate a central config-file-agnostic > respository. A single interface is used by all to read config data from > the repository. Even if we did this, I don't see what it would give us > anything. All our existing applications access data that's only specified > in a single config file anyway, so interchangable back-end files would be > an unused feature.
True, it doesn't give _us_ much to be agnostic to what the config file format looks like. However, with different back-ends used to populate the single config repo at run-time, we then have the ability to not have config files at all (well, except the meta-config stuff). What I mean is: An administrator might like to store the cluster configuration in an inventory database which isn't local to the cluster itself (e.g. LDAP, or whatever). This might not be a requirement now, but that was one of the points of having multiple config back-ends, IIRC. I guess there's no reason that we couldn't cache a local copy of the configuration... *shrug* -- Lon _______________________________________________ Openais mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/openais
