[Spread-users] New to spread, some questions

[Scott Barvick]

Ryan,

I've seen the issue of resetting all of the daemons when you want to add a new one come up before.  We are also interested in having this be more dynamic.  Is it on anyone's list to do or any idea of the amout of work it would take to do it?

Thanks,
Scott


-----Original Message-----
From: spread-users-bounces at lists.spread.org on behalf of Ryan Caudy
Sent: Thu 2/3/2005 9:59 PM
To: pedro smith
Cc: spread-users at lists.spread.org
Subject: Re: [Spread-users] New to spread, some questions
 
You seem to understand this correctly.  The set of spread daemons
(identified by hostname/ip address) must be known when the daemons are
started.  The limit of 128 spread daemons (#define'd as
MAX_PROCS_RING) is fixed at compile-time -- you might be able to make
some changes to this, but I'm not sure if anyone has done so, and
there may be complications that I can't think of off the top of my
head.  As far as I know, there aren't currently plans to change
Spread's functionality in these respects.

One thing to consider is that the 128 limit is a limit of the number
of daemons -- the number of clients is a large multiple of this. 
Also, you can run more than one Spread network on an overlapping set
of machines -- they simply must use different ports, or different
multicast/broadcast addresses.

Cheers,
Ryan


On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 18:46:54 -0800 (PST), pedro smith <und_pep at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi there, 
>   
> I just found Spread and I am very interested in learning more about its
> capabilities. I am considering using something like spread in a financial
> system. However I am worried about two issues. First, it seems that the list
> of machines participating in a spread segment must be know at system boot
> time. Is this right? Would I have to reinitialize every spread daemon in the
> system to add a new machine? Second, do I understand correctly that there is
> a hard limit of 128 machines in a spread network? If so, are there any ways
> around this limit, perhaps by bridging separate networks? 
>   
> Thanks in advance for any help, 
>   
> -pp 
>  
> 
>  ________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
>  Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term' 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Spread-users mailing list
> Spread-users at lists.spread.org
> http://lists.spread.org/mailman/listinfo/spread-users
> 
> 
>

_______________________________________________
Spread-users mailing list
Spread-users at lists.spread.org
http://lists.spread.org/mailman/listinfo/spread-users

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.spread.org/pipermail/spread-users/attachments/20050205/96e9b842/attachment.html