On 10/08/2012 10:21 AM, Bela Ban wrote: Maybe choose another acronym to avoid collision with [2] :) Tristan [2] http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/products/clustering/overview/index.html

Hi Bela, I think the concept of memory as stable storage is a good one, except we will also need to account for virtualized nodes. For instance, we'd want updaters {A,B,C} to be on separate machines, if possible, and the ranking process of new views should also account for the physical machine they're on. This way we could lose entire machines and still know what keys to update. In essence, this is a similar concept that a TopologyAwareCH uses. Thanks, Erik -----Original Message----- From: infinispan-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org [mailto:infinispan-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of Bela Ban Sent: Monday, October 08, 2012 4:22 AM To: infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org Subject: [infinispan-dev] RAC: Reliable Asynchronous Clustering Hi all, I've come up with an alternative to sync TX updates across sites. It's based on the requirement that we need high reliability between sites, but yet it isn't feasible to run 2PCs across sites. RAC [1] is supposed to be almost as fast as async replication and close to the reliability sync replication provides. I've published the design at [1], and we'll present it in more detail at our clustering meeting in Palma early November. Comments and feedback are welcome ! [1] https://community.jboss.org/wiki/RAC -- Bela Ban, JGroups lead (http://www.jgroups.org) _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev