jackrabbit-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dominique Pfister <dpfis...@adobe.com>
Subject Re: [jr3 trade consistency for availability]
Date Wed, 29 Feb 2012 11:20:12 GMT

On Feb 28, 2012, at 3:54 PM, Marcel Reutegger wrote:

> I'd solve this differently. Saves are always performed on one  
> partition,
> even if some of the change set actually goes beyond a given partition.
> this is however assuming that our implementation supports dynamic
> partitioning and redistribution (e.g. when a new cluster node is added
> to the federation). in this case the excessive part of the change set
> would eventually be migrated to the correct cluster node.

I'd like to better understand your approach: if we have, say,  
Partitions P  and Q, containing subtrees /p and /q, respectively, then  
a save that spans elements in both /p and /q might be saved in P  
first, and later migrated to Q? What happens if this later migration  
leads to a conflict?


> regards
> marcel

View raw message