geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Aaron Mulder <ammul...@alumni.princeton.edu>
Subject [Deployment] IM #2 Summary for Directory Issue
Date Fri, 03 Oct 2003 22:38:13 GMT
	Okay, had another IM conversation with Jeremy, and some new things
came to light, and I'll present this as an alternative to the previous
option.  As before, please feel free to chime in with feedback.

1) There will be some way of saving the current MBean state of the server
and reloading it later.  That way when you start the server, instead of
reprocessing all the config files, it will just "deserialize" the MBeans
into their previous state.  Then the deployment scanner will update that
state according to the current deploy directory (redeploying a service if
the config file changed, for example).  (Apparently this saving and
loading is a work in progress at the moment.)

2) There will be a "service controller" that manages the JSR-77 state of
various objects in the server.  I need to get more information about this
from Dain.  But the relevant part is that based on the above, all the
applications that were previously deployed have MBeans, and those MBeans
would brought back in the "stopped" state when the server is started.  
Then with the service controller in place, the service controller can go
try to start the ones that were formerly running.  Thus it is the service
controller (or if not, then the MBeans), not the individual app DDs, which
remember what state the different components are in.

2a) A possible corollary of "2" is that if the service controller knows
what should be running or not at any given time, that solves the problem
of what to do when something in the "deploy" directory is stopped.  The
service controller knows it was stopped, so we won't try to redeploy it
immediately.

3) Jeremy feels strongly that if you deploy an app via JSR-88, we should
just save it in a "working" directory and unpack it there, and not mix and
match JSR-88 deployment actions with "deploy directory" deployment
actions.  On the whole, I think we should focus on the larger differences
between this proposal and the last, and we can figure out whether to save 
downloads to the "working" directory or the "deploy" directory later.

Aaron


Mime
View raw message