On Fri, 15 Mar 2002, Hugues Jerome wrote: >Heinrich G�tzger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > >> what's your goal? > >write a survey on mom architecture for a student work :) Hey, that sounds interesting! I'm corious about your results.
> >I will introduce XmlBlaster for its client side aspect (multiple protocol, >call back mechanism ) and I was wondering what XmlBlaster could provide in >a server to server communication If you connect multiple server-proccesses to this mom (i.e. xmlBlaster) they could exchange messages using the mom philosophies like publish/subscribe or probably better point-to-point. >From this point of view xmlBlaster might be a very good provider for a smart interserver communication. A benefit of this set up would be that you could use the same technology providing your clients with all data they want. All connected to the same xmlBlaster-instance. I would propose using xmlBlaster as an as a mom between your client- and your server-proccess(s). This however is already possible and no development on xmlBlaster-side would be neccessary. > >> There have been some discussions about a master-slave/clustering set up, >> but unfortunately not on the list. >> There are issues like consistence of data on multiple xmlBlaster or >> bootstrapping or communication between two xmlBlaster. > >do you have any pointer or archive ? on the xmlblaster devel list perhaps ? well, we sat with a coffee and lot's of drawings...... Hmm, they might be somwhere in some archive, hopefully. But after all I'm not sure, if we talk about the same. Since it is a difference using multiple server on one xmlBlaster and using multiple xmlBlaster. xmlBlaster is not a server in the classical sense but it provides the possibility to exchange messages between proccesses. > >I understand there are a lot of issue not simple to solve, >but they are to be solved to be scalable ... well, you're very right Hope it helps regards Heinrich -- http://www.xmlBlaster.org
