I don't know if the docs are clear, but clustering is superior to ICP in every way. That is one reason why no one has cared for ICP I think. The main reason for us to get ICP working is for interoperability with other ICP caches (e.g. Squid).
Also, ICP is a flawed protocol, a better option is for us to implement HTCP, which Squid also supports. cheers, -- Leif On Oct 18, 2011, at 4:41 AM, "Henry C." <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, October 18, 2011 09:24, [email protected] wrote: >> 在 2011-10-18二的 08:43 +0200，Henry C.写é“： >>> On Tue, October 18, 2011 04:46, [email protected] wrote: >>> Only once the down node >>> was brought back up did things become snappy again. >> there should be no issue when one cluster member down, it will discover the >> change and rehash the contents to the left nodes in cluster. the timeout or >> heatbeat checking will be <10s. after that, it will be stable as before. > > Thanks, you were right - this had to do with the linux virtual server and it's > persistence setting on the directors. >
