cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From KAWAI Hiroaki <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] fixing the tomcat situation, post 4.1?
Date Tue, 05 Mar 2013 01:31:12 GMT

 From the side of technology, what we need to run cloudstack management
server is J2EE container (JPA, JTX and so on).
As for J2EE contianer, there's a TomEE in apache project which
is less generally available in common distribution packages.
I think Tomcat is an appropriate option referring the availability.
# But at the same time, I think TomEE would be appropriate because
# cloudstack is also an apache project now.

We would need servlet because we need web UI to take control.

For configuration files, I think whatever container we choose,
those files would be look like as tomcat at last. There would
be no big difference.

(2013/03/03 22:04), Noa Resare wrote:
> So, when working with the 4.1 packaging issues I have more than once been
> intensely frustrated with the current tomcat situation.
> To recap: Some cloustack components are set up as web applications and
> requires a servlet container as their execution environment. The current
> solution to provide such as servlet container is to have the cloudstack
> package depend on an Apache Tomcat 6 package provided by the OS
> distribution. Cloudstack then ships copies of the configuration files
> needed by tomcat to run along with init scripts that bootstraps tomcat in a
> way that references the cloudstack shipped artifacts. This setup has many
> problems.
> # Cloudstack assumes that it's configuration files will be enough in sync
> with what the externally provided tomcat expects.
> # Lots and lots of fairly esoteric config files included in cloudstack
> makes the learning curve steep
> # Tomcat setup, as it stands without trying any specific hackery to make it
> do other stuff, is a labyrinth of shell scripts
> # Things gets even more complicated when cloudstack invokes tomcat provided
> scripts.
> # tomcat has it's own log files for the early parts of it's startup.
> It shouldn't need to be this hard. webapps are standardized for a reason,
> and the requirements we have on a servlet execution environments are not
> that special (one webapp on /client listening one port, and possibly
> another webapp for the aws stuff listening on another port)
> As a proof of concept I hacked together the starting points of
> a replacement for this whole mess yesterday, a few tens of lines of code
> setting up an embedded jetty web container. A few lines of code to parse a
> config file, set up logging and spawn an embedded servlet container.
> Points of discussion:
> # What features do we need for our servlet container? Do I miss
> anything obvious?
> # Do we have some kind of loyalty towards tomcat, it being one of the main
> apache projects after all? 2 minutes of googling seems to indicate that
> there are embedded tomcat options as well, but I know jetty better so that
> seemed like a better stating point for my proof of concept.
> My proof of concept code is available here:
> /noa

View raw message