Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of david.blevins@visi.com
 designates 208.42.156.2 as permitted sender)
In-Reply-To: <445A865E.1000307@coredevelopers.net>
References: <4458D199.3010009@coredevelopers.net>
 <3B0B4762-F0D0-4018-9316-59F89C010980@visi.com>
 <4459B3E7.60405@coredevelopers.net>
 <3AA5E052-0EB3-424A-A20D-EA7F13DF0427@visi.com>
 <445A865E.1000307@coredevelopers.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v749.3)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Message-Id: <B4AB2F07-275E-49DB-B642-6FFA74B28E31@visi.com>
Cc: krab@trifork.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: David Blevins <david.blevins@visi.com>
Subject: Re: Was: Clustering: Monitoring... - Now: Clustering: OpenEJB...
Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 21:01:43 -0700
To: dev@geronimo.apache.org


On May 4, 2006, at 3:55 PM, Jules Gosnell wrote:

> David Blevins wrote:
>
>> The goal of those  protocols is to interop in a language agnostic  
>> fashion.  WS are all  stateless for EJB, so there is nothing to  
>> cluster anyway.
>
> stateless calls are still clustered - the load-balancing and  
> failover considerations still exist - you just do not require  
> session affinity (stickiness). If you are talking about server-side  
> requirements, then I agree.

Right, I always forget there is a world outside the server state :)

>> But for  IIOP, would we simply not offer clustering to people  
>> using CORBA to  interop with clients in other languages or on  
>> other platforms?
>
> to tell the truth, these cases have escaped my radar - My CORBA  
> knowledge is pretty thin and I have only really considered it in a  
> java/java environment - I am sure that Kresten would be much better  
> positioned to answer this question... I will CC this to him, in  
> case he would like to pick it up...

Same here.  Maybe Kresten has some ideas.

-David