incubator-openmeetings-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "" <>
Subject Re: Updated Cluster Architecture
Date Tue, 15 Jan 2013 01:21:06 GMT
Hi Maxims,

please review again, I changed it even more.

This SOAP/REST sync between nodes is really not good. It will be much too
A lightweight session object in the database as you proposed initially is
That way every node in the cluster has a lightweight (but clustered)
session store available and can redirect the user to the correct node (and
we have no cluster specific code in our app).

Also that way we can use a DNS load balancing as like any other web
application and our HTTP traffic is clustered. Not only RTMP.
I think this approach more meets the real world.


2013/1/15 Maxim Solodovnik <>

> Hooray :) less components is better :)
>  On Jan 15, 2013 7:39 AM, "" <>
> wrote:
>> I have updated the graph for the cluster architecture:
>> The biggest change is that master and slave have the same database (or
>> database-cluster). That makes it a lot easier.
>> The master will still need to coordinate the load, so he needs to ping
>> all slaves to collect the load and redirect to the slave that has the least
>> traffic (or that actually already hosts the requested room)
>> However the slaves can handle both HTTP and RTMP traffic. There is no
>> need to separate that anymore as the slave would use the same database as
>> the master.
>> For syncing the recordings and other files to the master HDD there are
>> multiple solutions. One would be like Maxim proposed to do a Samba mount.
>> The other is for example to use some RSync scripts. This can be decided
>> by the end user on its own.
>> I think this is more suitable then the previous approach and uses the
>> standard mechanisms for clustering.
>> Let me know what you think about that.
>> Thanks!
>> Sebastian
>> --
>> Sebastian Wagner

Sebastian Wagner!/dead_lock

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message