I can see the benefit of such feature.
Alireza, it should be fairly straight forward to implement (1 day
implementation, 1 day QA). It would entail an addition of a master node
protocol message (to indicate a takeover action between two nodes, then
followed by an assertion by the new master), and exposing the API's from
the provider level up to the GMS level. Submit an issue along with a
patch, we'll gladly consider the new feature.
Mohamed
Shreedhar Ganapathy wrote:
> In a sense this exists as a forcible takeover API thereby allowing an
> existing leader to relinquish its leader role.
> I would be very interested in your use case though as it will help
> make our documentation on intended uses for such a thing more clear.
>
> Sent from my phone
>
> On Feb 13, 2008, at 7:14 AM, Shreedhar Ganapathy
> <Shreedhar.Ganapathy_at_Sun.COM <mailto:Shreedhar.Ganapathy_at_Sun.COM>> wrote:
>
>> That's not something we found a need for. So it does not exist
>> today. Is there use case where this would be useful?
>> Thanks
>> Shreedhar
>>
>> Sent from my phone
>>
>> On Feb 13, 2008, at 7:08 AM, Alireza Farhoush <alireza_at_tibco.com
>> <mailto:alireza_at_tibco.com>> wrote:
>>
>>> Can a member relinquish its role as a leader without leaving its
>>> group (assuming that there are more that one member of course)?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Alireza