Some people deploy using RAID for that. We could also add software-level mirroring support to the FC. Why not do that?
On May 22, 2013, at 2:08 PM, Israel Ekpo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I wanted to get some feedback from others before deciding whether or not to
> continue working on this.
> I initially filed this improvement/new feature because of use cases where
> there is a hardware failure on the machine where the agent is currently
> In terms of disaster recovery, having the events queue up on a remote
> machine (preferably in the same internal network) will allow another agent
> with the same configuration to pick it up from another machine and restart
> the process of data transport towards the sink.
> Sometimes, events may take a while to process and they may end up staying
> in the channels (FileChannel) for a long time, during which hardware
> failure could occur.
> If the data in the events is mission critical, this could cause a lot of
> headaches if there is no easy way to recover from the hardware failure
> after events have been queued up in the file channel.
> What are your thoughts towards the remote channel? I understand there is a
> JDBC Channel (http://flume.apache.org/FlumeUserGuide.html#jdbc-channel) but
> I have heard it has performance issues.
> This is why I am deciding to use a NoSQL store to solve this.
> I would like to get some feedback from others so that I can prioritize the
> tasks in my JIRA queue especially with the 1.4.0 release deadline drawing