Re: A proposal for a General Clustering Framework

[Greg Lindahl <lindahl@conservativecomputer.com>]

> > That's correct. And if you make these requirements explicit and
> > available to the lower layers, they can provide appropriate
> > services.
> 
> I sort of agree, but also sort of not.  Communications protocols are rarely
> so modular that you can turn every individual feature on and off with a
> switch.  That being the case, sometimes there's a mismatch that is only
> highlighted but not solved by making the higher-level protocol's needs
> explicit.

I never said that every set of lower layers will provide exactly what
every set of higher layers will want. I was talking about the right
interface that can let the right thing happen if people care.

The point of the current discussion is to define that interface. I
think the other part, data representation, pretty much got agreement
from everyone.

-- g

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