[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Vrs-development] (no subject)

From: Chris Smith
Subject: Re: [Vrs-development] (no subject)
Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 11:27:46 +0100

On Thursday 02 May 2002 07:53, address@hidden wrote:
> --- Eric Altendorf <address@hidden> wrote:
> > On Thursday 25 April 2002 17:07,
> >
> > Why would this force the entire cluster image to be
> > sent across?  Couldn't a
> > message, "Node X has joined the cluster" be
> > sufficient?  Sorry, these are
> > probably dumb questions; I'm just kind of lost here.
> This right, only the new data is transmitted to other
> existing LDS's.  The whole Cluster Image is sent only
> once when a new LDS joins a Cluster.

It's the mechanism behind this that gets tricky, as you
have to work real hard to stop cyclic messages being sent

> The cluster image will be sent to the new LDS only once but wht about the
> updates to other LDS connected to the VRS.

Each LDS would periodically poll the 'cluster' to see the
state of it.  This is done by Goldwater domains anyway,
and you can use the API to see if a node is available
or not.  At least that's the idea.

This is why I thought the data-bound Mobile Agent idea
was a good one, in that as the message is passed from
node to node and the tree is built up, a node can
detect that it is already in the tree and act
accordingly.  Also, when the message is on the way
back to the originator, any nodes on that route may
take the information contained in the tree and update
their tables, thus removing the need for them to
send out a refresh 'gather' message themselves.

Chris Smith
  Technical Architect - netFluid Technology Limited.
  "Internet Technologies, Distributed Systems and Tuxedo Consultancy"
  E: address@hidden  W: http://www.nfluid.co.uk

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]