[erlang-questions] Distributed application and netsplit

Mark Nijhof <>
Thu Nov 20 15:05:13 CET 2014


Can these be put in a gist.github.com so we can all (or at least
me) benefit?

On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Imants Cekusins <> wrote:

> Hi Leonard,
>
> Is there maybe a repo where this list's members can upload their code
> samples?
>
> These are only a few files. Not sure if they merit own repo.
>
> I email you the files in a separate message.
>
> On 20 November 2014 14:42, Leonard Boyce <>
> wrote:
> > Hi Imants,
> >
> > I'm certainly interested in this.
> >
> > Maybe instead of dealing with plenty of requests from interested
> > parties now and in the future, it may be a good idea to just add a
> > github repo with the example code?
> >
> > Leonard
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 7:36 AM, Imants Cekusins <>
> wrote:
> >> Working two-application (supervisor, worker) sample code is available.
> >>
> >> It works with nodes shut down and in the case of netsplit.
> >>
> >> Email me if you are interested.
> >>
> >> On 20 November 2014 04:49, Zulfiqer Sekender <>
> wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>> I am too waiting for this. Could you please let me know in which
> version of
> >>> Erlang/OTP, this will be included and approximately when that version
> can be
> >>> released?
> >>> Thanks.
> >>>
> >>> -
> >>> Zulfiqer
> >>>
> >>>> Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2014 13:18:08 -0800
> >>>> From: 
> >>>> To: 
> >>>> Subject: Re: [erlang-questions] Distributed application and netsplit
> >>>>
> >>>> > The problem is, once the net split has been detected, how then to
> >>>> > manually shutdown the unwanted application instance(s) in such a
> way that
> >>>> > the distributed application failover continues to work from that
> point
> >>>> > forward.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > The OP already has application-specific code which is able to detect
> >>>> > that a net split / split brain scenario has occurred.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > Furthermore, the OP is "ok" writing application specific code to
> attempt
> >>>> > to resolve the situation at that point.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > The question is, what is the "best" way to go about doing that?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> thanks.
> >>>>
> >>>> ok so it sounds like more clearly what we want is to know that OTP has
> >>>> been designed / will be updated to handle this at the level of it
> >>>> "going back to normal" at the OTP level, leaving the actual "sync up"
> >>>> part to the individual applications that use OTP.
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> erlang-questions mailing list
> >>>> 
> >>>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> erlang-questions mailing list
> >>> 
> >>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
> >>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> erlang-questions mailing list
> >> 
> >> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> 
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>



-- 
Mark Nijhof
t:   @MarkNijhof <https://twitter.com/MarkNijhof>
s:  marknijhof
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20141120/c6b27215/attachment.html>


More information about the erlang-questions mailing list