I’m wondering if there is any more traction on this item?
I understand the whole it used to be there, but now it is not…but from a feature perspective, it might be nice to be able to support this configuration OOTB without a plugin. Might be echoing the general message of the masses…but thought it was worth (re)mentioning.
Some thoughts that I’d like to throw out there and get everyone’s thoughts on are the following:
As mentioned in this thread, an active/passive strategy is doable with OpenFire. Is this what the OpenFire team recommends? Is it just because there are no other options at this point in time, or is it because it is the best ROI from both developer/consume? Minus the standard argument of data missiing in memory between N servers (not being synced up), how does this manifest to the end-user? What are some worse possible case scenarios, besides a person having to re-engage a chat-session/room. Just trying to make sure I’m not being too narrow minded…so this is a true open question.
As I attempt to move forward to bring together OpenFire/Clearspace (a vision started almost 2 years ago when Clustering was an option). I have some regret in seeing this issue more or less stall out. For better or for worse, the best I can do know is try to solicit some feedback on known “work-arounds” and their successes/caveats in the short-term. Hopefully, this may generate a “recommended” clustering option from the community that is achievable given all the tools we have today. This option may only be for high-availability, and not so much for load, but we take the good with the bad…as long as we understand the boundaries in which we can push the solution.
Thanks in advance for any discussions/commentary moving forward on this subject. Looking forward to getting to know this product a bit more in the near future. =)