[Dev] Rethinking scalability as a goal

[Tim Randolph]

As long as Chandler won't *require* a server for full functionality 
then I am all for this.  Otherwise, I am very nervous.

If the idea was that the clients were going to include "Fractional 
horsepower" HTTP servers that rely on existing protocols, it is very 
easy to imagine servers fitting in nicely.  Servers would be just 
another peer on the network that happen to be up all the time, are 
backed up and have big pipes.  It also easy to imagine this working if 
servers are not even full peers, but standards-based, simple hosts for 
publish and subscribe -- ala what Apple has done with iCal and WebDAV.

But is that what you have in mind?  Or are you imagining something more 
like Napster or Exchange?  The current vision seems to be for Chandler 
to take advantage of standards based web, mail, directory and calendar 
servers.  Tell us more about what it means to have a "Chandler" server.

--Tim




On Thursday, November 14, 2002, at 05:50 PM, Mitch Kapor wrote:

> One area we are now rethinking, based on input from the mailing lists 
> and other sources, is whether also build Chandler from the outset to 
> support large organizations, not just small-to-medium ones.  Based on 
> further internal brainstorming, it seems less difficult than what we 
> had imagined.  It also looks fairly likely we will be getting some 
> world-class technical help on a volunteer basis.
>
> Note that such support, which would involve some kind of server, does 
> not mean we are going to focus on large enterprises as customers.  
> Scalability is but one of a number of requirements for a true 
> enterprise solution.  It does mean that, if we go in this direction, 
> Chandler could provide a solution for a university environment.
>
> I'm posting this now, before a commitment has been made, to get 
> reaction and feedback.
>
> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
>
> Open Source Applications Foundation "Dev" mailing list
> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/dev