jackrabbit-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Stefan Guggisberg" <stefan.guggisb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: New workspaces are not clustered with LocalFileSystem
Date Tue, 07 Aug 2007 10:51:48 GMT
hi shaun,

please create a jira bug issue.

cheers
stefan

On 8/7/07, sbarriba <sbarriba@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> I'm hoping to come up with a solution for the following clustering show
> stopper - no responses thus far.
> Does anyone have any suggestions?
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Shaun.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: sbarriba [mailto:sbarriba@yahoo.co.uk]
> Sent: 01 August 2007 21:28
> To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
> Subject: New workspaces are not clustered with LocalFileSystem
>
> Hi all,
>
> We're continuing to tune our fault tolerant JackRabbit environment.
>
> Thus far we have:
>
> .        2 machines
>
> .        Each running Tomcat 5.0.30 with JackRabbit 1.3 as a model 2 shared
> resource
>
> .        JackRabbit is configured with MySqlPersistenceManager,
> LocalFileSystem and Database Journal
>
> .        Each Tomcat node hosts an web application allowing users to
> create/delete/edit JCR nodes. The web application also allows users to
> create new workspaces.
>
>
>
> The problem we've hit is that new workspaces are not clustered. Creating a
> new workspace (Workspace2) on node A does not result in a new workspace
> being created on node B e.g.
>
> Node A file system:
>         Repository
>         Version
>         Workspaces
>                 Workspace1
>                 Workspace2
>
>
>
> Node B file system:
>         Repository
>         Version
>         Workspaces
>                 Workspace1
>
> This is problem for us as new workspaces are being created all the time,
> hence they must be automatically clustered.
>
> I'm guessing this problem occurs as the "create workspace" mechanism is
> JackRabbit specific and is outside of the JCR spec and event model?
>
>
>
> Potential solutions:
>
> .        Move to a DatabaseFileSystem - there are a couple of disadvantages
> to this for us. We like to be able to view and amend the files and in
> particular we regularly updated the custom_nodetypes.xml with new types as
> part of an upgrade process. Presumably the nodes types would be less
> accessible within the database.
>
> .        Use a Network File Share for local files - we're trying to achieve
> the simplest solution for fault tolerance therefore we'd rather avoid the
> complication of filesystem replication schemes (Linux DRBD etc) or the
> expense of SAN solutions.
>
> .        Manually create copy new workspaces - also not really an option as
> new workspaces are created all the time
>
>
>
> All suggestions welcome.
>
> Regards,
>
> Shaun.
>
>
>

Mime
View raw message