avalon-phoenix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Daniel Krieg" <dkr...@kc.rr.com>
Subject Re: Phoenix and the Web
Date Wed, 02 Oct 2002 11:09:26 GMT

>  > I imagine that other components
> > might require the ability to deploy web applications, create custom
> > blocks within the web server, start/stop these service blocks, etc.
> Hmm... not sure about that one. Do we really want to write a management
> for Catalina? Also, it breaks IoC, doesn't it?
Catalina already has a management console, we would simply be allowing
clients to invoke without being tightly bound to Catalina.  Breaks

>  > For
> > example, say that I have created a phoenix service that controls an
> > hardware resource and want to be able to manipulate that service via a
> > application.  I would need to create a block that depends on Sevak and
> > the ability to specify a webapp Context that contains references back to
> > itself, and to specify which Host within Sevak this webapp should be
> > deployed to.
> You could do that with JMX much, much easier.
You could do everything with JMX...no need for Avalon framework then...just
look at JBoss!  I would much rather program to compile-time checked
interfaces that pass around ObjectNames any day.

> > Phoenix is an application server kernel...utilizing Phoenix as a
> > embedded within a Web Container does not make much sense.
> Catalina is also an application server kernel embedded within a Web
I disagree.  Catalina is a Container that manages the lifecycle of Servlet
instances.  Phoenix is a Container that can manages the lifecycle of
Avalon-based instances--who have a much richer set of lifecycle methods than

> > If they won't componentize their design, we must create abstract
wrappers to
> > adapt the two.
> The problem I see is that we don't change anything semantically by writing
> wrappers. You can wrap a GOTO statement in XML syntax, but it's still a
> Maybe I'm being overly pessimistic here :)
Why do we need to change anything semantically?  What is inheriantly wrong
with the current state of Web Containers???  Far more reliable than GOTO

> >>3) How about an ajpv12 or ajpv13 component?
> > You lost me here...what is the advantage?
> A Phoenix application can then act as backend to every webserver that
> ajpv13 without the need for an intermittent Servlet Server. So this is
going to
> run on many platforms, not just a specific Servlet Server like Catalina.
> it might be the easiest route, because the source code could be nicked
from mod_jk.
You want to rewrite the Servlet's API to Avalonize it?  Could easily be
done...but would always be a non-standard technology.

> > If you are looking for a way to provide web access via Sockets, I
> > such components exist within Excalibur that can be used within Phoenix.
> Really? I couldn't find anything in the docs. Maybe in CVS?
I checked...it is in the Cornerstone project...ConnectionManager and
SocketManager components.

To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:avalon-phoenix-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:avalon-phoenix-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>

View raw message