Re: ForCES Protocol Implementation Issues
" B. J. Kang " <ttt710516@GMAIL.COM> Mon, 17 September 2007 02:53 UTC
Message-Id: <SUN.16.SEP.2007.225329.0400.>
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2007 22:53:29 -0400
From: "B. J. Kang" <ttt710516@GMAIL.COM>
Subject: Re: ForCES Protocol Implementation Issues
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="big5"
On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 12:20:37 -0400, Joel M. Halpern <joel@stevecrocker.com> wrote: >If we want the FEState to be the way that a cE administratively >disables and FE, then we would need to make a larger change. When I >drafted the FEState component, my expectation was that >administratively disable would reflect non-Forces interaction, such >as a "disable" CLI command. >Given that the other two values (operationally disabled and >operationally enabled) can not be used as the value in a set >operation, I think that to change this we would have to create two >separate variables, a read-write admin-status and a read-only >operation-status. (I thought we had that at one point and decided >not to keep it, but I could be confused.) > So, is there any good solution about "CE starts a FE or stop it" in current time ? Or you want to charge the draft? >For every table (array) in a Forces Object there is a properties >object (accessible via the protocol) which includes the first free >table entry, as well as the last used table entry. So the >information the CE needs is always available. >In fact, since the CE generally created the table, and created the >entries, it is anticipated that the CE will normally have a mirror >copy with any annotation information it wants, obviating the need to >query these fields. > What you mean is that I can get the information about which row is free without getting all the contents of a table to find the index of free rows? If so, when i want to add some things to a table, I must still get some data at first. Isn't it a complicated thing? Because I try to implement Failover, I can not think that Backup CEs have the mirror copy of all FEs. Thanks a lot. >Yours, >Joel >
- Re: ForCES Protocol Implementation Issues Wang,Weiming
- Re: ForCES Protocol Implementation Issues SUBSCRIBE FORCES B. J. Kang
- Re: ForCES Protocol Implementation Issues SUBSCRIBE FORCES B. J. Kang
- Re: ForCES Protocol Implementation Issues Joel M. Halpern
- Re: ForCES Protocol Implementation Issues Joel M. Halpern
- Re: ForCES Protocol Implementation Issues Jamal Hadi Salim
- Re: ForCES Protocol Implementation Issues Jamal Hadi Salim
- Re: ForCES Protocol Implementation Issues Joel M. Halpern
- Re: ForCES Protocol Implementation Issues Joel M. Halpern
- Re: ForCES Protocol Implementation Issues B. J. Kang
- Re: ForCES Protocol Implementation Issues SUBSCRIBE FORCES B. J. Kang
- Re: ForCES Protocol Implementation Issues Joel M. Halpern
- Re: ForCES Protocol Implementation Issues Jamal Hadi Salim
- Re: ForCES Protocol Implementation Issues Jamal Hadi Salim
- Re: ForCES Protocol Implementation Issues SUBSCRIBE FORCES B. J. Kang
- Re: ForCES Protocol Implementation Issues Joel M. Halpern
- Re: ForCES Protocol Implementation Issues B. J. Kang
- Re: ForCES Protocol Implementation Issues Jamal Hadi Salim
- Re: ForCES Protocol Implementation Issues Joel M. Halpern
- ForCES Protocol Implementation Issues B. J. Kang