Re: A proposal for a General Clustering Framework

["Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>]

While I tend to agree that for the kinds of messages under discussion here
(as well as the kinds I'm interested in for a cluster FS) RPC adds
complexity while offering minimal (at best) value, the existing discussion
has made it pretty clear that the 'RPC' they're talking about includes a
datagram-like facility (inappropriate as that may be for something called
'RPC').

Given that (and the ability to use it to avoid the kinds of problems
uncontrolled retries and consequently lengthier time-outs can cause), the
use of this kind of 'RPC' seems at worst a bit silly.  And since the
facility won't be designed to be useful for the kinds of things I'm
interested in anyway, I can't get too excited about that - though I'd hoped
it would be a lower-level, more generally-useful facility that I *could*
use.

- bill


----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Darcy" <linuxguy@tambreet.com>
To: "David Brower" <David.Brower@oracle.com>; "linux-cluster"
<linux-cluster@nl.linux.org>
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2001 5:21 PM
Subject: Re: A proposal for a General Clustering Framework


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