+1 for bringing this code to Karaf. I haven't tested this out thoroughly or even looked deeply at the code, but in general I like this idea. I certainly agree with some of Guillaume's points, however unless there is a suitable alternative I think this will provide a good starting point for the community to get involved and improve it.
Chris -- Chris Custine My Blog :: http://blog.organicelement.com On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 09:06, Ioannis Canellos <ioca...@gmail.com> wrote: > Guillaume, I haven't seen all your points, so here are some comments for the > rest: > > *Automatic discovery is really a myth imho. Such protocols have to use >> multicast and multicast is really forbidden in a lot of places. So >> *relying* on multicast would be a mistake I think. I've seen >> hazelcast can be configured using static ips which sounds better >> (though multicast is nice for demos, no problem with that).* >> > > In places like EC2 or other Cloud platforms, indeed multicast is forbidden, > but in a private cluster, multicast is great. > So I would say that automatic discovery is not panacea, but its still a very > strong feature. > > >> *That's really my problem. Maybe it's a misunderstanding, but when you* >> * say "replication", I hear same thing everywhere, which I have a >> problem with. >> I think that definitely solve some problems, but it looks too limited.* >> > > Let's don't stick to the "term" replication. Let's just say that it provides > means to configure a group of nodes instead of a single one. And note that > not all nodes are in total synch. You can configure what you want to sync. > The configuration means can be extended and become more granular in order to > fit all needs. > > > -- > *Ioannis Canellos* > * > http://iocanel.blogspot.com > > Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC > Apache ServiceMix <http://servicemix.apache.org/> Committer > * >
