Hi Israel, Some people deploy using RAID for that. We could also add software-level mirroring support to the FC. Why not do that?
Regards, Mike On May 22, 2013, at 2:08 PM, Israel Ekpo <[email protected]> wrote: > I wanted to get some feedback from others before deciding whether or not to > continue working on this. > > I initially filed this improvement/new feature because of use cases where > there is a hardware failure on the machine where the agent is currently > running. > > In terms of disaster recovery, having the events queue up on a remote > machine (preferably in the same internal network) will allow another agent > with the same configuration to pick it up from another machine and restart > the process of data transport towards the sink. > > Sometimes, events may take a while to process and they may end up staying > in the channels (FileChannel) for a long time, during which hardware > failure could occur. > > If the data in the events is mission critical, this could cause a lot of > headaches if there is no easy way to recover from the hardware failure > after events have been queued up in the file channel. > > What are your thoughts towards the remote channel? I understand there is a > JDBC Channel (http://flume.apache.org/FlumeUserGuide.html#jdbc-channel) but > I have heard it has performance issues. > > This is why I am deciding to use a NoSQL store to solve this. > > I would like to get some feedback from others so that I can prioritize the > tasks in my JIRA queue especially with the 1.4.0 release deadline drawing > nearer. > > Thanks.
