-
1. Re: Need help with JGroup traffic in case of network failure
belaban May 24, 2006 11:34 AM (in response to j.hedin)Yes, although this is not load balancing the traffic over the 2 network, this is sending the *same* traffic over both lines, so this is costly.
-
2. Re: Need help with JGroup traffic in case of network failure
j.hedin May 24, 2006 12:48 PM (in response to j.hedin)Thanks for the rapid answer
Extra load is workable. My main consert was if there was any problem with that a cluster node gets multiple copies of the messages. My second consert is if there is problem with multiple joining of groups. The third consert was the external interface, which will block the cluster traffic through IP tables.
Is there an alternative solution? -
3. Re: Need help with JGroup traffic in case of network failure
belaban May 24, 2006 3:07 PM (in response to j.hedin)"J.Hedin" wrote:
Thanks for the rapid answer
Extra load is workable. My main consert was if there was any problem with that a cluster node gets multiple copies of the messages.
Yes, each node gets 2 copies of a message, but since we tag each message with a sequence number, the 2nd duplicate message will simply be discarded.
My second consert is if there is problem with multiple joining of groups.
You're not joining multiple groups, it is just the transport protocol in JGroups wich sends the *same* traffic out via 2 interfaces rather than 1. -
4. Re: Need help with JGroup traffic in case of network failure
j.hedin May 24, 2006 4:09 PM (in response to j.hedin)Perfect. Sounds like a working solution for a fault tolerant cluster interconnect. Will do some tests on the development servers.
Thanks
Johan Hedin -
5. Re: Need help with JGroup traffic in case of network failure
belaban May 25, 2006 4:11 AM (in response to j.hedin)Yes. In the future, we could think about writing additional transports, whcih for example multiple the entire traffic across multiple networks, this might even result in better performance. But that's for the future... :-)