[Openais] questions regarding openais-0.80.1

[edrt]

>On Tue, 2006-09-19 at 23:16 -0700, Steven Dake wrote:
>> On Wed, 2006-09-20 at 08:05 +0200, Hans Feldt wrote:
>> > edrt wrote:
>> > 
>> > > I'm going to deploy openais in a product, the minimum functionality wanted is:
>> > > 2N model + su failover & autorepair on 2 node configuration. Can previous 
>> > > openais release support it? And which version do you recommend? BTW, can I 
>> > > know the estimated timeframe openais HEAD will support multinode configuration.
>> > 
>> > I don't think previous versions support what you need. The release of
>> > "Wilson" is not decided but I guess will be delayed until the services
>> > contained in it has reached some critical content and/or stability. This
>> > is open source...
>> > 
>> edrt,
>> 
>> The requirements for Wilson are production services of Cluster
>> Membership, Eventing, Checkpointing, Closed Process Groups, and Extended
>> Virtual Synchrony passthrough interface.  Also it supports production
>> redundant ring operation.  All other services are not supported at this
>> time and are only present for developers to get a feel for how they
>> work.  We chose not to remove them entirely from the tree, but they
>> should be considered buggy and not ready for deployment (AMF included).
>> The tree is essentially frozen to any new content except things that fix
>> critical bugs and do not change backward compatibility with other Wilson
>> releases.
>> 
>> What you desire will be in the next release of openais called Humphreys
>> (1.0).  I had hoped this would happen by year end, but distributed
>> locking and messaging are as of yet incomplete and we are still working
>> out a few subtle issues in Wilson which take priority.  Humphrey
>> requirements are Wilson + production AMF, production locking, production
>> messaging.  Of the remaining services to implement, AMF (which you
>> desire) is highest priority and will be fully solved next in line after
>> Wilson bug fixes.
>> 
>
>Please substitute my use of Wilson above for Whitetank (0.80) and
>Humprehys for Wilson (1.0).
>
>Sorry for the confusion.
>

Hi Hans & Steven:

Thanks for the reply. It's clear now.

BTW, another question: does current totem implementation support safe ordering 
delivery? I can't find codelogic supporting that.


Thanks
Eddy