geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jan Bartel <j...@mortbay.com>
Subject Re: Layered deployment
Date Wed, 12 Nov 2003 23:53:05 GMT
Alan,
> I believe that we may need a layered deployment mechanism.  This does not
> change the architecture of deployment, just adds more deployment goals and
> adds more detail to what deployment planners for WEB/EJB modules must do.
> Let me explain what my problem is, how I understand the current deployment
> system works, and what my proposed solution is.
> 
> My problem relates to security modules that need to be re/deployed before
> and must be undeployed after the WEB/EJB modules that they service.
What is the architecture of the security service? I'll look over on the 
wiki for some info, but a bit of an overview would be extremely helpful ...


> It's my understanding that the DeploymentController gets a bunch of
> DeploymentGoals in the form of DeployURLs and starts "randomly" passing them
> around various registered DeploymentPlanners.  These DeploymentPlanners
> opportunistically eat the goals and spit out plans. If I add a
> SecurityDeploymentPlanner, there is no guarantee that there will be any
> DeployURLs left by the time the DeploymentController gets to it.  Even if
> there was a way to guarantee that the SecurityDeploymentPlanner, there is no
> way to pass information on to the WEB/EJB deployers to ensure the proper
> start/stop dependency.
Do we really need to make the security service a deployment planner? I 
thought a suitable level of granularity of a deployment planner was a 
deployable unit (an ear, a war, an ejb jar, a service, rar etc). Each 
deployer uses various services in order to perform its deployment, and I 
envisaged a security service as being pretty fundamental to all of the 
j2ee deployers. That is, I thought that all the j2ee-type deployers 
would be explicitly looking to contact a security service that would do 
whatever security setup was necessary. I was thinking that this contact 
would be via calls on a security service mbean. What is the motivation 
for making it a deployment planner?

cheers,
Jan


> 
> One solution is to not have a SecurityDeploymentPlanner and have the WEB/EJB
> deployers generate plans for the security modules.  I don't like that
> solution since I don't like the tight coupling.
> 
> Another solution is to add more goals for module deployment.  Maybe
> something like
> 
> StartDeploy -> SecurityDeploymentPlanner -> ModuleDeploy ->
> WEB/EJBDeploymentPlanner
>                             |                                           |
>                             V                                           V
>                      SecurityPlans
> ModulePlans
> 
> The ModuleDeploy goal would contain enough information for the modules so
> that the proper start/stop order is maintained.  The idea is that the start
> goal is not the same as the goal that modules deployment planners eat.  This
> will allow any number of layers to be configured, w/ no additional
> programming.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Alan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------- 
>       Visit our Internet site at http://www.reuters.com 
> 
> Get closer to the financial markets with Reuters Messaging - for more
> information and to register, visit <http://www.reuters.com/messaging> 
> 
> Any views expressed in this message are those of  the  individual sender,
> except  where  the sender specifically states them to be the views of The
> Reuters Group.



Mime
View raw message