Hi, wouldn't it be possible to use the groupname as private_name? Then there would be no need to configure this by the property file.
I automated it this way: You need to tell my app, the controller ips, the database ips, the database name, the users and their privileges. My app connects to the databaseserver, creates the instances and users. Then an empty vdb.xml is loaded, filled with the right data and send to the controllers using jmx. After that, one of the backends is picked and used for the cluster initilization. Afterwards a dump is taken from this backend and transfered to the others. Then all backends are enabled. That's it. What about the problems, I reported with spread. I'm unable to do any write on the cluster using spread... > Hi, > > On May 30, 2007, at 10:33 , [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> I do need for every group an own >> hedera.channel.spread.private_name, am I >> right? >> > > Yes. > >> In my eyes I would need a bunch of property files, for every >> virtualdatabase an own, right? >> > > In the current implementation, yes, I think so. > >> Is there a way to configure this by the vdb.xml? > > Only if the continuent people add it. In the current implementation, > you only configure spread using these properties file. > >> Because I try to automate the process of creating our >> virtualdatabases and >> I would prefer having one spread.property file for all and just >> adapting >> the vdb.xml. Do you understand my problems? > > Yes, I understand :) Its a nightmare. > How do you automated the adaptation of the vdb.xml? > > regards, > -- > Nuno Carvalho > University of Lisbon, Portugal > http://dialnp.di.fc.ul.pt > > > > _______________________________________________ > Sequoia mailing list > [email protected] > https://forge.continuent.org/mailman/listinfo/sequoia > _______________________________________________ Sequoia mailing list [email protected] https://forge.continuent.org/mailman/listinfo/sequoia
