On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 2:18 PM, Erik Buene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > But this would counteract the high availability aspect of clustering, as it > would introduce single point of failure on this node. I guess it would be > possible to set up hearbeat or some other way of telling if other nodes are > up and delegate the responsibility to take the task, but it would really > complicate the system.
You could annotate the nodes that "throw" the events with an application / cluster node identifier so that the event listener can tell local and remote events apart. Or use some locking mechanism that only one event listener actually handles the events. Alex -- Alexander Klimetschek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
