Excellent news and thanks for the summary.  I have more comments to make however
life is catching up with me at the moment.  Let me get back to this email in a little bit.


On 9/21/07, Martin Alderson <equim@planetquake.com> wrote:
Hi Alex,

For my fairly limited use mitosis is performing very well.

I've slacked off a bit over the last few weeks but will try to get back
onto it soon.

For stable use there is still that critical issue where a change on the
same entry on multiple servers will lead to a permanently inconsistent
state.  I'll make that my priority soon.

I also recently came across a minor timeout issue which I think is a
problem in MINA.  I'll investigate that more soon too.

Aside from that there are niggling issues like replication of schema
changes.  Once these issues have been worked out I think we have a
stable replication system.

There are some features that I guess we really need to get in for it to
actually be useful for the majority of users though.  The main things
that come to mind are selective replication, encryption, schedules and
removing the dependency on Derby.

I know you and Ersin are thinking about possible design changes although
to me those can be done incrementally later on as required.  I doubt
that I will be a driving force behind these changes but am willing to help.


Alex Karasulu wrote:
> Hi Martin,
> Was just curious what you think about the state of Mitosis.  Could you give
> us an update of
> how it's performing for you as well as the additional work you think needs
> to be done on it?
> I want to start looking at making it production stable for a 2.0 final
> release down the line
> (early 2008).
> Thanks,
> Alex