Firstly, we should strive to be consistent with how our XML configuration works, so IMO,
boo-moo should be booMoo (I'm talking about backup-strategy here).
Now, I'm confused with the global settings. What backupStrategy should define is how
to communicate with the other site, i.e. if you wanna use a different bind address,
different transport protocol…etc. This is the same that we do with the global transport
settings. We don't define whether backup (or in clustering, replication or
invalidation..etc, is sync or async) is sync or async at this level. This configuration,
sync/async, belongs to the cache level IMO.
Does it make sense to have/define a site without the transport that you're gonna use
to configure with it? You could potentially have N different networks to connect to N
sites. If you assume the default, which default is it?
Line 31, what about this config instead?
<syncBackup name="NYC"/>
You could still have <backup> for when you want to use default mode as per the
cache. So, you'd have: backup, syncBackup, asyncBackup.
And line 25: <backups> instead of <sites>
On Jul 6, 2012, at 3:06 PM, Mircea Markus wrote:
Hi,
This[1] is the first draft of the cross-site (x-s)[2] replication bela and I came with.
Any feedback is more than welcomed!
Cheers,
Mircea
[1]
https://gist.github.com/3059621
[2] we've also thought of using the term 'site' instead of
'datacenter'. Dataceneter is a bit too specific, not as concise and also
inconsistent with the term 'site' we've been using for the
TopologyAwareConsistentHash.
_______________________________________________
infinispan-dev mailing list
infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
--
Galder Zamarreño
Sr. Software Engineer
Infinispan, JBoss Cache