On 07/21/2011 06:27 AM, Proskurin Kirill wrote: > On 07/21/2011 05:11 PM, Steven Dake wrote: >> On 07/21/2011 02:30 AM, Proskurin Kirill wrote: >>> Hello all. >>> >>> Is this possible to use multycast as primary way to communication in >>> cluster but fall back to unicast transports if multycast is fail? >>> Different rings with different transports? >>> >>> We have some problems in network switches and multycast just stop >>> working and I start to think about this feature. > >> Just use udpu entirely. This feature is supported n 1.3.2+. > > I`m on 1.4.0 now but I not wish to use unicast as production base - only > if some problems with multycast occur. > >
There is no fallback. You can specify one transport or the other. Thinking a moment how to implement this type of feature, it could not be reasonably implemented. What type of app are you running on top of corosync? The advantages of multicast is automatic growth (you don't have to know the node addresses ahead of time) and more throughput with less cpu utilization on high cpg message throughput. The disadvantage is multicast is generally poorly implemented by switch vendors. Regards -steve _______________________________________________ Openais mailing list Openais@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/openais
