geode-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dan Smith <dsm...@pivotal.io>
Subject Re: Pulse - Non-Embedded Mode
Date Wed, 01 May 2019 17:43:33 GMT
Option 2 does sound like a good way to go. It does seem like if you are
making changes to fix non-embedded mode, you probably need to add an
acceptance test for that mode since there is non already, regardless of
whether you deprecate non-embedded mode.

I have no issues with deprecating either embedded or non-embedded mode. I
don't think we've put a lot of energy into pulse recently.

-Dan


On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 2:12 PM Jens Deppe <jdeppe@pivotal.io> wrote:

> More accurately, I think geode-core is only required when TLS is enabled on
> the locator and Pulse needs to make JMX/RMI calls over TLS.
>
> I would vote for option 2 in this scenario.
>
> --Jens
>
> On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 1:44 PM Jinmei Liao <jiliao@pivotal.io> wrote:
>
> > I believe to run pulse in non-embedded mode, you just need to install the
> > war in a web server and some configuration changes, you don't need
> > geode-core at all.
> >
> > We do lack the acceptance test to run pulse in non-embedded mode though.
> We
> > have a few unit tests that touches some aspect of it.
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 12:10 PM Michael Oleske <moleske@pivotal.io>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Geode Community!
> > >
> > > Some colleagues and I were looking at GEODE-6683 (
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-6683) and noticed that we
> do
> > > not have test coverage for running Pulse in non-embedded mode.  We were
> > > wondering what our strategy is around Pulse in non-embedded mode. In
> > order
> > > to fully fix the issue, we would prefer to have a high-level acceptance
> > > test that actually tries to run Pule in non-embedded mode (we could not
> > > find an existing acceptance test that performs this).   However, this
> > > non-embedded mode seems a bit odd, as the instructions for it (
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://geode.apache.org/docs/guide/19/tools_modules/pulse/pulse-hosted.html
> > > )
> > > are slightly confusing and need some updating for geode (such as making
> > > sure geode-core is on the class path). It seems strange to try and
> host a
> > > web app in this way, especially with the extra configuration needed
> > (cannot
> > > just plop the Pulse war file in my web server with some config and have
> > it
> > > work).  So there's some questions about the best path forward.
> > >
> > > 1.  Should we continue supporting non-embedded mode for Pulse?  It
> seems
> > > like it may be useful to allow Pulse to run outside of a member, but
> not
> > as
> > > it currently does.  If it was deprecated, I wouldn't be as insistent on
> > an
> > > acceptance test for it.
> > >
> > > 2.  Should we try to make a separate artifact that is intended to be
> > > deployed on a web server?  This would have a new artifact that could
> run
> > > elsewhere then (with maybe a user provided config file for properties.)
> > >
> > > 3.  For the issue that brought up these questions (GEODE-6683), we have
> > > currently only written some unit tests to add the properties. So the
> > > current question is what type of path forward should we take?
> > >
> > >
> > > -michael
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Cheers
> >
> > Jinmei
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message