Does this at all help on the "redundancy" in storage? If Entity1 lives on NodeA, then it can't only store itself on NodeA (assuming NodeA is a single host) as it will get destroyed both in RAM and disk at the same time. But would it be possible to create small clusters which shares a redundant store for storage, but where each Entity only live on a single host? Is that at all smart? And isn't the "share nothing" philosophy creating new (interesting) challenges for indexing and searches? (Or does one just accept that Google, Yahoo... are "almost-infinite scalable")
Cheers Niclas _______________________________________________ qi4j-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev
