[erlang-questions] Fishing for best practices: distributed twin processes!
Sat Sep 15 08:21:49 CEST 2012
Try contacting Laura Castro from Uni of Coruña who presented at the
Erlang Workshop 2012 yesterday regarding handling of netsplits and node
Their team had to go through some investigations before they got the
resilience they had promised the customer!
The big question for you will actually be what to do when the layers
thinks that the other node is down - will you assume a net split and
buffer communication (if that is feasible for your application)? Or will
you assume node down and do a major clean-up?
On 2012-09-15 03:46, Roberto Ostinelli wrote:
> hello Michael,
> you're assuming right (separate VM), I'm familiar with links and
> monitors, thank you. However I doubt that any message is sent from a
> dying process if the VM on which it runs actually blows up. That was
> my point.
> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 3:47 PM, Michael Truog <mjtruog@REDACTED
> <mailto:mjtruog@REDACTED>> wrote:
> Assuming you have the 2 layers in separate Erlang VMs. You can
> have the Erlang VMs connected with distributed Erlang, and have
> the twin processes monitoring each other. If you wanted a simple
> process death if either died, you could consider using a link
> instead of 2 monitors. However, that seems like the simplest
> solution, to avoid unnecessary complexity. You might find
> strangeness if you start not using the default net tick time
> (i.e., with a process link inbetween nodes), with distributed
> Erlang, but you probably know it is best to not play with that.
> erlang-questions mailing list
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the erlang-questions