Sean Landis wrote: > I've heard a few people say they cannot use Outrigger (and I think > Blitz too, but I'm not sure here) because of the excessively high > failure rate of notify(). I'm afraid I haven't done the testing > myself, but those who say this tell me that the failures are more > related to the implementation than to the typical reliability > challenges. >
I've heard it too - trouble is everytime I ask for logging or tracing it all goes quiet, no feedback. So, I don't know the version, I don't get a test case or even pseudocode so I can write a test case and I get no logging. What is one to do? > Jini/JavaSpaces are designed to help the developer face the realities > of distributed computing (8 fallacies), but still the software should > do a really good job when all other things are working as hoped. It > shouldn't be an additional source of challenges. > > Regarding polling, that seems counter-productive. I understand Gregg's > arguments about truly reliable software, but it seems that we aren't > just talking about dealing with unreliable networks but rather a > workaround for the additional unreliable nature of the notify() > implementation. > > I realize the implementation in question conforms to the > specification. That doesn't resolve the issue. > > Does anyone see this as an impediment to adoption? Should the notify() > implementation be visited going forward? > I don't think I understand this question - there's more than one implementation and it's up to individual implementers and their users to work together to sort it out? Dan.
