activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Christopher G. Stach II" <...@ldsys.net>
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
> 
> http://www.basepath.com/aup/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


Mime
View raw message