SO with the emergence of logging node, I am encoutering an issue with clusterization and was seeking feedback on whats a better way to do this.
Presently I have been using: @if (( Cluster::is_enabled() && Cluster::local_node_type() == Cluster::MANAGER ) || ! Cluster::is_enabled()) @end if and events worker2manager_events and manager2worker_events. With logging node: I can surely do "Cluster::local_node_type() == Cluster::LOGGER" and then events logger2manager_events and logger2worker_events etc etc so on so forth. The issue I am facing is that to begin with I don't know if someone is only going to run manager only or if someone is going to run logger node as well, making the following clumsy: - @if (( Cluster::is_enabled() && Cluster::local_node_type() == Cluster::MANAGER ) || ! Cluster::is_enabled()) - if manager then use worker2manager and manager2worker events OR - @if (( Cluster::is_enabled() && Cluster::local_node_type() == Cluster::LOGGER) || ! Cluster::is_enabled()) - if logger then user logger events ? Any thoughts on how to handle existence or non-existence of logger node in a clusterization scheme ? Aashish _______________________________________________ bro-dev mailing list bro-dev@bro.org http://mailman.icsi.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/bro-dev
