geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sean Hamblett" <>
Subject Re: RES: RES: "Virtual Hosting"
Date Fri, 08 Aug 2003 17:59:34 GMT
>> Besides, I´m not arguing to separate the servers by 
>>separating the VMs
>> of each server, although this sound like a good solution 
>>to me, if the
>> VM's footprint don't become a issue to worry about. I'm 
>>just saying that
>> creating several server directories is better than 
>>assuming a
>> each-ear-is-a-separate-application policy or creating a 
>>config file to
>> say how the ears are grouped.
>	Do you mean, for example, one VM, but 3 deploy dirs, and
>everything in a deploy dir is grouped together but 
>separated from the rest
>of the "deployments", and all the deploy dirs are started 
>when the server
>is started?  Then you can put one ear per deploy dir, or 
>10 EARs per 
>deploy dir, and it will just load things together which 
>are located 
>together?  That makes sense to me.

Ok, what I am thinking is like Tomcat, but beyond a 
webapps directory, where it would be a container directory 
and it could be configured to have a 'servername' 
directory as the default, and if you wanted another server 
configuration, you could add another directory, which 
could then contain a different server configuration.  Then 
if you want to deploy a single ear to multiple server 
configs you could, if you wanted to deploy different ears 
to the same server config you could, if you wanted to 
deploy different ears to different serever configs you 
could.  I think this flexabliity to have multiple 
configurations of a server, and multiple servers with the 
same configuration could be benificail and could possibly 
help with clustering, but I am not a clustering expert, so 
I could be way off base here.


View raw message