IDP Cluster going forward (JDK 7)

Marc Thornton marc.thornton at gmail.com
Tue May 28 16:20:35 EDT 2013


I believe Terracotta's "next big thing" is essentially a move to the
Terracotta-based EHCache, which we already make use of in our solution (for
other clustering needs).  I agree that the Terracotta DSO mode was fairly
intrusive during maintenance activities, often requiring a full restart &
clean of the solution after a web application re-deploy... I am hoping that
the non-DSO mode will be a bit more flexible in that regard, but only time
will tell.  And it probably won't solve the maintenance issues you have
identified.

Thanks a lot for your time on this.

Marc


On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 9:50 AM, Cantor, Scott <cantor.2 at osu.edu> wrote:

> On 5/28/13 9:13 AM, "Marc Thornton" <marc.thornton at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >I would be interested in having access to Paul's Infinispan plugin and/or
> >any other clustering-related plugin sources.
>
> https://wiki.shibboleth.net/confluence/display/SHIB2/Contributions
>
> > My understanding with Terracotta was that there really wasn't any
> >Terracotta-specific code in the Shibboleth IDP, therefore any work that
> >may have been done to identify the integration points for an alternate
> >clustering approach would be more than welcome!
>
> There's basically one API you implement. If you want to try and implement
> that for Terracotta's "next" big thing, you're certainly welcome to.
> That's why it's not a migration path from DSO, it's just a totally
> different approach.
>
> My issue with clustering is that if it doesn't solve the maintenance
> problem, I'm not very interested in it. By which I mean that if I can't
> take down any of my active IdP nodes for maintenance with no service
> interruption, I don't understand what it's buying me. I might as well use
> active-passive, in which case I can avoid clustering entirely.
>
> >From a general point of view, memcache is a reasonable substitute for
> Terracotta for the time being, in that it adds a process that has to be
> running or the system won't work. But that breaks the maintenance property
> since I can't patch the memcache host without breaking the IdP.
>
> The downside of the stateless approach is that you can't implement logout.
> Since I believe logout doesn't work anyway, I don't see that as being much
> of a tradeoff.
>
> But V3 needs to provide both alternatives in a maintainable way.
>
> -- Scott
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list send an email to
> users-unsubscribe at shibboleth.net
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://shibboleth.net/pipermail/users/attachments/20130528/42b3c997/attachment.html 


More information about the users mailing list