directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kiran Ayyagari <kayyag...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Replication configuration
Date Wed, 14 Nov 2012 06:01:45 GMT
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 11:24 AM, Emmanuel Lécharny <elecharny@gmail.com> wrote:
> Le 11/14/12 6:16 AM, Kiran Ayyagari a écrit :
>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 3:00 PM, Emmanuel Lécharny <elecharny@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi guys,
>>>
>>> I have some questions about the replication configuration...
>>>
>>> AFAICT, we may configure the server to be a consumer, a producer, both
>>> of them, or none of them.
>>>
>>> A standalone server will not be a producer or a consumer
>>> A master server will be a producer
>>> A slave server will be a consummer
>>> A master/slave server will be a producer and a consumer
>>>
>>> In any case, a server will always be able to be a producer as soon as it
>>> allows another server to connect on it as a consumer, and get
>>> replicated, so for a server to be a producer is just a matter of
>>> receiving a consumer request.
>>>
>>> Am I right ?
>>>
>> yes
>>> I'm asking because I added a flag that allow a server to become a
>>> producer on demand as soon as the ads-replicationEnabled flag is set to
>>> true (this flag is used to start the replication handler when the server
>>> is started). Does it makes sense to keep this flag ? Or should we always
>>> start the replication handler ?
>>>
>> prior to this flag we have always looked for the presence of
>> ads-replReqHandler attribute
>> if it exists we instantiate this class and the server acts as a provider/master
>>> I'm inclined to think that teh flag is a good thing to have. wdyt ?
>>>
>> If the above attribute's absence can be treated as a 'false' value so
>> IMHO this flag is spurious in a way
>
> The reason I added it is that without it, we will either require that
> the user add the replication handler FQCN (not very simple to find it),
> or to start the handler automatically using the defaumt value. I don't
> find both solution very convenient.
>
agree, I just fancied the idea of switching replication implementations
based on custom protocol implementations
> I would rather question the fact that the replicaton handler is loaded
> using its FQCN : why don't we just have a boolean flag, and nothing else
> ? (if the flag is true, we laod the default handler)
>
absolutely, we can go ahead just with the flag except if we want to still allow
injecting a new provider impl
>
> --
> Regards,
> Cordialement,
> Emmanuel Lécharny
> www.iktek.com
>



-- 
Kiran Ayyagari
http://keydap.com

Mime
View raw message