2018-07-26 18:36 GMT+09:00 Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org>: > On 26/07/2018 11:27, kfuj...@apache.org wrote: > >> Author: kfujino >> Date: Thu Jul 26 09:27:35 2018 >> New Revision: 1836707 >> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1836707&view=rev >> Log: >> Add New Static Membership Service implementations. >> - initial implementaion that remain a lot of TODOs. >> > > I appreciate that this is a work in progress. Can you explain the > differences / benefits / disadvantages of this vs. the > StaticMembershipInterceptor? > > I'd like to understand when I should use one or the other. > > The main motivations for implementing the new static membership are,
I would like to implement this as a channel membership service instead of implementing it with the channel interceptors. Setting multiple interceptors is complicated in order to configure static membership. It should work with only StaticMembershipService setting. In other words, it should not depend on interceptors such as TcpFailureDetector and TcpPingInterceptor. Also, I wanted to unify the implementation of Tomcat clustering's membership service. Currently, McastService and StaticMembershipService are implemented in a unified way. If someone implements another membership service (like cloud membership?, for example) it can also use MembershipServiceBase and MembershipProviderBase in the same way. Thanks. > Thanks, > > Mark > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org > > -- > Keiichi.Fujino > <dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org> > <dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org> >
