[jboss-user] [JBossCache] - Re: Buddy replication behavior

puggelli do-not-reply at jboss.com
Fri Jan 19 04:11:59 EST 2007

I used the word 'gravitation' also for backup data, may be improperly.

anonymous wrote : 
  | cache[1] also now sees /_BUDDY_BACKUP_/ since cache[2] realises that it doesn't have a backup anywhere anymore, and hence assigns cache[1] as it's new backup node with it's state. 

This movement of the primary data that are without backup can cause a "network storm", but this is inevitable.
Why there isn't an equivalent movement for the backup  data that are without primary (e.g. /_BUDDY_BACKUP_/ on cache[1]) ?

My major concern is not related to the "network storm" but to the fact that in case of multiple faults the cluster has information loss. For example: Let suppose that first the cache[0] dies and then after one minute also the cache[1] dies. In this case the data stored in the node /one is lost forever.

Thanks and regards
Gianluca Puggelli

View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4003705#4003705

Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4003705

More information about the jboss-user mailing list