geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Robert McIntosh <rob...@bull-enterprises.com>
Subject Re: RES: "Virtual Hosting"
Date Fri, 08 Aug 2003 21:34:44 GMT
This brings up a feature that I really miss from the now missing 
Gemstone app server. It had the ability to cluster VMs on a single 
machine (as well as across a network), and allow an admin to partition 
an app across those VMs if needed. It would also cycle VMs on a 
schedule, start up VMs if a particular load threshold was achieved and 
shut down unneeded VMs. Although I am not an admin type, I took one of 
their admin classes and I saw the performance differences by allowing 
the server to add VMs as the client load increased.

I do not remember too many of the details as it was a few years ago, but 
each VM had a configuration specifiying heap size, shutdown schedule, 
etc. Maybe with modern VMs this isn't necessary anymore, but on big 
hardware, like the 16 CPU Solaris box we were using, it seemed a shame 
that if a single VM shutdown for whatever reason that that $250k server 
was now dead as an app server.

my .02 :-)
Robert

Craig Wohlfeil wrote:

> I think this should be implemented within the VM as well. Imagine the 
> overhead of having another copy of the server running for every 
> application. I also think that you shouldn't have to have the server 
> installed twice to run a separate VM. With a large server (with 
> clustering support) it can more efficient to run 2/3 small VMs that 
> have the same configuration than one large one.
>
> Aaron Mulder wrote:
>
>>     However, I'm really suggesting we implement this within the VM,
>> whereas the above works by running multiple VMs.  If you want to run
>> multiple VMs, you can always just install the product twice.  I 
>> prefer to
>> also have the option to run apps sandboxed in the same VM.  Granted you
>> wouldn't be able to run different apps with different server components
>> (EJB/Web container, etc.) this way, but I think that's OK.
>>
>> Aaron
>>
>
>


Mime
View raw message