I'm hoping that JBoss Cache can recover cache consistency following a transient network outage. From my readings of both Cache and JGroups, I've ended up thinking that it's JGroups that notices begin-and-end of network partitions and that JGroups then notifies dependent classes so that they know that they need to deal with the potential merging of any higher-level state changes in each sub-cluster during the network partition. This seems consistent with a recent response from Bela Ban (2007.0914): http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=46EA2BA0.9090508%40... But from my understanding of JBoss Cache (the dependent class I'm considering) via: "JBoss Cache TreeCache: A Structured, Replicated, Transactional Cache" (http://labs.jboss.com/file-access/default/members/jbosscache/freezone/doc... ) I can't identify anything as directly addressing JBoss Cache's "application-data" healing from a network partition... Here's a particular test scenario that would need to handle the situation I'm thinking of: JBoss Cache ClusterName="A-B" with two members ("A" and "B") is started. "A" and "B" both view "A" as "coordinator". To keep things simple, let's have only a single region. No Cache Loaders are used -- thus all Cache state exists only in- memory (no back-end data store). Time passes peacefully and "A-B" builds up some amount of Cache state, all of it consistent across A and B. Then, a network partition occurs (perhaps a backbone router is powered down for 10-15 minutes to add an additional card). After some amount of time, both A and B finally end-up marking each other "dead" and themselves as JGroup coordinator for their sub-cluster. During this partition, both A and B can continue to accept updates to their Cache state, right? And this would result in the now-independent Caches becoming distinct from each other. So, once the result of the network partition is resolved, JGroups will realize this and notify JBoss Cache via a ViewChange. My question is: does JBoss Cache itself somehow merge the during-partition state changes together? Since neither member was itself down and both could potentially have partition-related state changes, causing either to simply dump their in-memory state and ask for a full state-transfer will result in a loss of information. _______________________________________________ jbosscache-users mailing list jbosscache-users(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosscache-users