Re: syn feedback

Hello, Roberto.

We use syn for all our registry needs even after our need to handle
splits has gone away due to changing requirements because it's so
reliable and easy to use.

One feature that my team is missing is the ability to register a process
multiple times under different keys. We have been helping ourselves by
spawning "forwarders" that register on behalf of our process and die
with it.

(If this got implemented in the meantime then we've missed it. Our
infrastructure requires us to freeze our libraries for long time periods
and so whatever version works for us gets used for a long time. We even
patch warnings ourselves when we change to a newer elixir version.)

Thanks for syn, it really helps our work!
Oliver

On 04.08.2021 18:37, Roberto Ostinelli wrote:
> All,
> I'm doing a brief survey on https://github.com/ostinelli/syn
> <https://github.com/ostinelli/syn> usage & desired features, as I'm
> missing some for my use cases and considering whether I should do a v3
> which includes those and others.
>
> For instance, here are some feature requests that I've received:
>
>   * Improved callback mechanisms when processes are registered /
>     unregistered / join / leave, especially in dynamic clusters.
>   * Support for Mixed-Cluster Versioning.
>   * Namespaces (aka scopes)?
>   * Allow the cluster to run nodes without syn (✓).
>
> I'd welcome any feedback you'd have while I'm going through this
> design / evaluation process, do not hesitate to reach out to me
> privately if you'd rather do so.
>
> Thank you,
> r.

--
Diese E-Mail wurde von Avast Antivirus-Software auf Viren geprüft.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus