[Spread-users] New to spread, some questions

[Ryan Caudy]

First, I want to make sure that we're talking about the same things. 
I think when you said "mailbox" you meant "group" in the terminology
Spread uses.  A "mailbox" usually refers to the handle/socket/fd
belonging to a single connected process.

To answer your question, if A sends to a group that only has members
connected to daemon-A and daemon-B, daemon-C *will* receive the
message, but won't deliver it to any processes.  The reason for this
is Spread's ordered-delivery protocol.  Better-engineered schemes
exist, but aren't implemented in the publicly available version of
Spread.

Cheers,
Ryan

On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 00:57:23 -0800, J C Lawrence <claw at kanga.nu> wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Feb 2005 19:02:31 -0500
> Ryan Caudy <rcaudy at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > For many basic applications, the recommendation is one Spread daemon
> > per machine that you'll have clients on.  This way, all the clients
> > can be local to their daemons.
> 
> Will a spread message to a given mailbox ONLY be delivered to the spread
> daemons which have processes listening on that mailbox, or will it be
> delivered to all spread daemons in the spread fabric?
> 
>   Three systems: A, B and C.
> 
>   Each system is running its own spread daemon which are mutually
>   connected.
> 
>   Similarly, on each system there's a process which we'll respectively
>   call A', B', and C', which are connected to that spread bus.
> 
>   A' & B' share a mailbox called "AB" (ie both are connected to it)
> 
>   B' & C' share a mailbox called "BC".
> 
>   A' & C' share a mailbox called "AC".
> 
>   If A' sends a message to the AB mailbox, will the spread daemon
>   running on C receive it for a client process that doesn't exist?
> 
> --
> J C Lawrence
> ---------(*)                Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas.
> claw at kanga.nu               He lived as a devil, eh?
> http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/  Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live.
>