activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Christopher G. Stach II" <>
Subject Re: Shared File System Master Slave with OCFS
Date Sat, 19 May 2007 07:37:49 GMT
James Strachan wrote:
> Thanks for the heads up! :)
> I guess we could make the locking strategy pluggable & we could have
> some implementation call the fcntl locking. e.g. maybe using Jtux

Even though one could achieve this, I don't know what the benefit would
be.  It only shifts the responsibility down.  At least the user would
want a broker that is dependent on one or more brokers.  Each of those
brokers shouldn't be dependent on each other for locking, data, or
anything else.  I can appreciate that some people assume that shared
data is available, but shared data is just as easily corrupted, locked,
or unavailable.  Essentially, when you find a single responsibility and
divide it, it probably shouldn't converge somewhere down the line.  This
current pattern is most likely unusable for any HA situation.

Christopher G. Stach II

View raw message