On 1/23/02 8:58 PM, "Aaron Smuts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I�d like to discuss what might be involved in making a JCS release.  We
> need to decide what feature should be included in a first release (or
> beta release) and where I should focus.

I think before any release we should probably tackle the build system a
little. I would like to eventually move these components to the commons but
even in the short term I think individual builds for the components is the
only way we can release individual components.

We can probably chat about this in NYC. I don't want to hold up a release of
JCS if you think it's ready and I can help (when I get back from NYC) to
restructure the repository so individual builds and testing will be
possible. I'll also help you get the documentation in XML format, I think
that's necessary before a release.

As far as what you propose below, until we become more familiar with the
package and if you think it's ready for a release than we can release it.


> 
> I�m working on a few things:
> 1.    Performance � al the bottle necks are in disk IO.  I�m running
> jprobe on the tester class.  Since the disk gets are synchronous they
> are usually slower than puts. I need to figure out a size to test at.  I
> usually test at 20,00 to 50,000 items in a region with only 1000 in
> memory.  1 out of 20 puts is over a ms.  1 out of 6 gets all coming from
> disk is 10-15 ms, the rest ar sub ms.  I want to even this out.
> Grouping is slower.
> 
> 2.    Cleaning up failover
> 
> 3.    Remote cache clustering.  I�m not sure how the cache cluster
> should work.  Right now, every cluster is connected to all clustered
> remote server.  All puts and removals are replicated.  I don�t allow
> cluster gets.  Clustered removal and puts are optionally sent to the
> local caches.  Group cache cluster may have locking problems.  I want to
> change the cluster to use the TCP lateral cache rather than remote.  A
> cluster only allows you to scale get requests and provides failover.
> Deciding how cache clustering should work is more difficult than
> implementing it.
> 
> 4.    Locking.  After some thought, I�d like to add a locking
> mechanism.  I�m thing about adding a token ring in the remote cache
> cluster.  If there is no remote then lock request may return null.  The
> remote cache could use the lateral as the token conduit, but the lock
> list.  I�m not sure what to do with the lock list.   . . .
> 
> 
> I�d like to continue on the first two and consider clustering and
> locking as coming features.
> 
> Aaron
> 
> 

-- 

jvz.

Jason van Zyl

http://tambora.zenplex.org
http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine
http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity
http://jakarta.apache.org/alexandria
http://jakarta.apache.org/commons



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to