[Spread-users] Is this a reasonable way to use spread?

[James Rauser]

Jonathan Stanton wrote:
> 
> To add a bit to what Theo said. Spread should support both of these
> requirements quite well. It was actually designed for exactly this purpose
> (to support a large number of clients with fewer servers, and to support a
> large number of groups).

That's comforting to hear.  This is my first attempt at building a
distributed system, so I'm poking in the dark and learning as I go.

> The current version (3.17.0) has been tested with at least 6000 groups
> active (on a few daemons) with upto 950 client connections per daemon. A

That raises a question: the impression I got from the docu and the papers
is that the minimum configuration for a spread network has one spread
daemon per LAN segment, but the "preferred" configuration would have one
daemon on each machine that is running a client process, allowing the
clients to connect via unix IPC instead of over the LAN.  Is this 
correct?  Presumably this would reduce network load since the final
delivery of messages to the clients doesn't have to go over the ethernet
cable.

For a smaller system, (say, up to 5 servers in one LAN segment, up to
15 clients, I would actually prefer to run with just a single daemon;
this would reduce the configuration effort to just writing the
daemon's IP address into spread.conf.

Greetings, Jim

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jim Rauser                                          Science Factory GmbH
mailto:j.rauser at science-factory.com                       Unter Käster 1
Tel: +49 221 277 399 204                          50667 Cologne, Germany