
Some parts of this message have been removed.
Learn more about Nabble's
security policy.
Hi Jose
Thanks for the reference to the paper - when using jxta I'm having to take into account node failure and clients are generally aware of which nodes have the database - jxta is pretty good at discovery. This idea is to ensure that clients connect to the 'best' connection at the time an operation is invoked. The 'load balancing' is effectively taking place on the client side.
The license is an issue do to the fact that customers may construct standalone applications using my libraries, your libraries and all the other libraries which they might pass onto their clients. Some customers may not not want to make public the source of their application. Other customers may be overlook the gpl issue, distribute an application without source and be unaware that they are contravening escadas license terms, and as a consequence be liable. All of the libraries I'm using, including my own (once they are ready), hibernate, jboss, jxta, derby etc have at worst the lgpl license, and at best the apache license.
I dearly hope we can resolve this licensing issue.
As for the client node and load balancing, I think that this is going to need some more thought.
Cheers
Nick
> From:
jop@...> To:
community@...> Subject: Re: Fwd: escada and jgcs
> Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2007 13:54:08 +0100
> CC:
nunomrc@...;
buzzheavyyear@...>
> On Friday 21 September 2007, Nuno Carvalho wrote:
> > From: buzz lightyear <
buzzheavyyear@...>
> > Date: September 21, 2007 1:25:47 PM GMT+02:00
> > To: Nuno Carvalho <
nunomrc@...>
> > Subject: RE: escada and jgcs
> >
> > My problem still exists with the gpl license, though. Unless someone is
> > able to change this to lgpl then I'm stuck.
>
> Can you elaborate on this? Do you a specific license compatibility problem?
>
> > Incedently, did you have any thoughts re. hibernates second level cache and
> > gorda/escada?
>
> Using a DBMS replicated with ESCADA should not cause any trouble for an
> application level cache that wouldn't exist with a single non-replicated DBMS
> backend. The only requirement is that you enforce client affinity: the same
> client should not use more than one replica unless a server fails. This
> shouldn't be an issue unless you use some sort of load balancer in between.
> For more details check this paper:
>
> http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1141277.1141442
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Jose Orlando Pereira
Are you the Quizmaster?
Play BrainBattle with a friend now!