Hi,
Actually, Hazelcast gives up consistency upon network partition. This
mean any implementation will experience random behavior when using
MESSAGE SEQUENCE number during a partition (and this is also true for
deletions). In my opinion, it does not really add guaranties compoared
to Cassandra,
Would a distributed im-memory backend such as hazelcast be an option to
start?
http://docs.hazelcast.org/docs/3.5/manual/html/licenses.html
On 2015-10-26 14:51, Benoit Tellier wrote:
Le 26/10/2015 14:08, Matthieu Baechler a écrit :
On 26/10/2015 13:53, Benoit Tellier wrote:
[...]
I
Hi Matthieu,
Thanks for your reply. I think this problem might be a quite taught one.
First of all, I guess you are right on why clients prefer using UID *
commands. I noticed it with thunderbird.
You are right about the consistency model of message queues (hence
having this discussion).
On 26/10/2015 10:54, Benoit Tellier wrote:
[...]
Seriously, I think dropping MESSAGE SEQUENCE NUMBER and returning an
error on distributed implementation is our simplest walk-around on this
topic... Doing overwise demands to add capabilities to the
MessageManager to handle MESSAGE SEQUENCE
Hi Benoit,
See my comments below.
On 26/10/2015 01:11, Tellier Benoit wrote:
[...]
Well, I have troubles to see how to make this work in a distributed
system. Message systems do not offer perfect guaranties and we might get
a lot of troubles in case of network partitions. Double event
Le 26/10/2015 11:08, Matthieu Baechler a écrit :
On 26/10/2015 10:54, Benoit Tellier wrote:
[...]
Seriously, I think dropping MESSAGE SEQUENCE NUMBER and returning an
error on distributed implementation is our simplest walk-around on this
topic... Doing overwise demands to add
Le 26/10/2015 14:08, Matthieu Baechler a écrit :
On 26/10/2015 13:53, Benoit Tellier wrote:
[...]
I think we could create a Session row that map MESSAGE SEQUENCE NUMBER
to the real messages. Then, for a given session, we never remap things,
we only add messages to this row. In case of
On 26/10/2015 13:53, Benoit Tellier wrote:
[...]
I think we could create a Session row that map MESSAGE SEQUENCE NUMBER
to the real messages. Then, for a given session, we never remap things,
we only add messages to this row. In case of EXPUNGE, we create a new
row that won't be used until a
Disclaimer : the following message is long, and might take time to read,
but I think this is a topic we have to exchange on in order to have a
working James in a distributed environment...
=
Hi every one,
I am working on a
