On 7/5/2010 at 04:54 PM, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 6:21 AM, Tim Serong wrote:
> > On 6/30/2010 at 09:42 PM, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
> >> On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 5:41 PM, Lars Marowsky-Bree
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > another idea that goes along with the previ
On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 6:21 AM, Tim Serong wrote:
> On 6/30/2010 at 09:42 PM, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 5:41 PM, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > another idea that goes along with the previous post are cluster-wide
>> > attributes. Similar to per-node attribute
On 6/30/2010 at 09:42 PM, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 5:41 PM, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > another idea that goes along with the previous post are cluster-wide
> > attributes. Similar to per-node attributes, but basically a special
> > section in :
> >
>
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 5:41 PM, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> Hi,
>
> another idea that goes along with the previous post are cluster-wide
> attributes. Similar to per-node attributes, but basically a special
> section in :
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Hi,
another idea that goes along with the previous post are cluster-wide
attributes. Similar to per-node attributes, but basically a special
section in :
These then would also be referencable in th
