Yeah, it should work with the docker host filesystem.
Regards
JB
On 19/06/2018 16:40, imranrazakhan wrote:
> Ok i will look into it.
>
> As of now i dont have NFS, so will try to use HOST file system for locking.
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://karaf.922171.n3.nabble.com/Karaf-User-f930749.htm
Ok i will look into it.
As of now i dont have NFS, so will try to use HOST file system for locking.
--
Sent from: http://karaf.922171.n3.nabble.com/Karaf-User-f930749.html
By the way, a possible new feature would be to implement a locking
mechanism based on Cellar, leveraging jClouds, Hazelcast, Ignite,
Zookeeper, whatever.
I already started something with jClouds.
Regards
JB
On 19/06/2018 16:09, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Hi,
>
> you can't do that with Cellar
Hi,
you can't do that with Cellar (again, Cellar is active/active).
For "pure" failover, you have to use the lock mechanism. Your two docker
processes should:
1. use a shared filesystem (like NFS) to store the lock
2. a database lock
Kubernetes POD could be used with Cellar to discover the clus
Ok, thanks for updates.
Please provide details how we can achieve failover behavior(A 'hot' standby
instance) like mentioned in
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/karaf/site/production/manual/latest-3.0.x/failover.html
in Docker environment?
How karaf support to communicate between two ima
Hi
Cellar is not an active-passive solution, it's cluster deployment solution.
It means that all instances are active, all instances can be part of the
same cluster group, and then, you can install features/bundles/configs
on this cluster group.
For instance, you do:
cluster:feature-install clu
Hi,
I have two karaf instances with Active-Passive configurations. Following is
deployment details
1- One become master and all bundles are with start status.
2- Second instance is also up but all my developed bundles are with install
status but not running.
3- Both instance communicate on socke
