RE: Fault tolerance

Niclas,

What I'm trying to get to is *not* having to explicitly invoked from the
component the etherization and creation steps.  In my case, I would like to
make my component have a transient lifestyle, and do the following on an
error in the implementation of the JMS MessageListener or the onException. 

	try{
		....
	} catch(Exception e){
		_serviceManager.release(this);
		notifyMonitorOfChildDeath(this.ROLE);
	}

Here, I will create a Monitor component whose sole purpose is to wait for
the child death and basically lookup() the child component through the
serviceManager which will re-invoke its creation step (configure,
initialize, start, etc...).  I can reuse this monitor component to restart
other components given their "id"

Am I trying to hard ? Thanks, in advance.
Mansour
:-)

PS:  what is "traditional SFT" ?


-----Original Message-----
From: Niclas Hedhman [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2004 2:52 AM
To: Avalon framework users
Subject: Re: Fault tolerance

On Tuesday 28 September 2004 05:51, Mansour Raad wrote:

This is really not "traditional SFT".

> Was wondering if somebody has a strategy on making a component resilient
to
> failures due to its dependent components.  In my case,  I have a JMS async
> listener, that will receive an onException if the jms router died.  What
is
> the best way to restart the component and keep trying until a connection
is
> established ?

Well, generally speaking each component should only make itself resiliant to

failures and know how to recover from external problems.

I need more information about your particular case to give better advice.


Cheers
Niclas

-- 
   +------//-------------------+
  / http://www.bali.ac        /
 / http://niclas.hedhman.org / 
+------//-------------------+


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]