Re: A proposal for a General Clustering Framework

[Peter Badovinatz <tabmowzo@yahoo.com>]

--- Alan Robertson <alanr@unix.sh> wrote:
> Bill Todd wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > Sending raw structures works only in homogeneous-endian environments anyway
> > (though file systems do need the ability to send raw file data as
> > byte-strings, since they haven't a clue what the internal structure of it
> > may be and must leave interpretation up to the application).  

I can't keep up with all of the sub-threads here :)  So I'll answer here, since
I had a comment on this.  I'd like to reiterate on this comment, and on others,
that avoiding raw, low-level data format is key here.  Been there and done
that.

While it allowed us to pack messages down to minimal sizes, it requires us to
play fun games with future development and upward compatibility - i.e., as each
node is migrated to a new level of code, the message tricks to keep everything
straight get very complex.  We do this on the RSCT clustering (we've had to
coexist up to four - major - releases of code, so it's doable.  But, ugly. 
This doesn't mean that you get this upward compatiblity for "free" with a more
open (e.g., XML) representation, but you do get a much more visible process,
and it should be easier.

So, ok, I don't think this representation side is what's causing it to go off
hereabouts...

<snip, rest of this message is not relevant to my comment :o) >

Peter

=====
These have been the opinions of:
Peter R. Badovinatz -- (503)578-5530 (TL 775)
wombat@us.ibm.com/tabmowzo@yahoo.com
and in no way should be construed as official opinion of 
IBM, Corp.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 
a year!  http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

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