geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Richard Monson-Haefel <Rich...@Monson-Haefel.com>
Subject Re: "Virtual Hosting"
Date Sat, 09 Aug 2003 18:59:50 GMT
I don't think this is much of a problem. In fact, I thought OpenEJB's JNDI ENC
Impl partitioned things very nicely by associating requests with deployment
ids. That way each deployment had its own branch in the JNDI tree, and
branches were isolated. Anyway, I don't think its a big deal to support this.
In fact, I think its probably a natural outcome of development.

Aaron Mulder wrote:

>         I'd like to suggest that Geronimo should support running
> applications in a "sandbox".  Which is to say, I'd like it to be able to
> run several different apps, where each app can see only its own JNDI
> entries, only its own DB pools, etc.  That also means each app should be
> able to be packaged with its own config files / DDs.  I don't mind if the
> server keeps an internal copy elsewhere, but I'd really like to be able to
> just give an ear with all the configs it needs and have Geronimo run it in
> a separate space from other apps.
>
>         I guess this impinges in the JNDI discussion as well, in the sense
> that a JNDI request from a remote client would need to identify the
> application it's targeting, either via a suffix on the initial URL, or an
> additional context parameter, or something along those lines.  So two
> different apps could each deploy something at "/Foo", and as long as the
> client specified which app it wanted to connect to, it would get the right
> one.  This also lets different apps use different security realms, and
> still secure JNDI.
>
> Aaron

--
Richard Monson-Haefel
Author of J2EE Web Services (Addison-Wesley 2003)
Author of Enterprise JavaBeans, 3rd Edition  (O'Reilly 2001)
Co-Author of Java Message Service (O'Reilly 2000)
http://www.Monson-Haefel.com



Mime
View raw message