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

Re: A proposal for a General Clustering Framework

To: "Alan Robertson" <alanr@unix.sh>
Subject: Re: A proposal for a General Clustering Framework
From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 17:20:03 -0400
Cc: "linux-cluster" <linux-cluster@nl.linux.org>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0106051256060.2717-100000@blap.linuxdev.us.dell.com> <3B1D3382.C86658B6@unix.sh>
Sender: owner-linux-cluster@nl.linux.org

Please ignore the comment about positional parameters I just sent:  on
re-reading your post, I see that it was the RPC argument sequence rather
than the XML representation that caused the issue.  Of course, if all you're
going to use is single-argument RPCs (to avoid that issue), that further
calls into question whether the RPC framework is really buying you all that
much.

- bill



Linux-cluster: generic cluster infrastructure for Linux
Archive:       http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-cluster/

Follow-Ups:
- Re: A proposal for a General Clustering Framework
  - From: Alan Robertson <alanr@unix.sh>

References:
- Re: A proposal for a General Clustering Framework
  - From: Michael E Brown <michael_e_brown@dell.com>
- Re: A proposal for a General Clustering Framework
  - From: Alan Robertson <alanr@unix.sh>

Prev by Date: Re: A proposal for a General Clustering Framework
Next by Date: Re: A proposal for a General Clustering Framework
Prev by thread: Re: A proposal for a General Clustering Framework
Next by thread: Re: A proposal for a General Clustering Framework
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread