geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alan D. Cabrera" <...@toolazydogs.com>
Subject RE: Deployment heirarchies
Date Sun, 12 Sep 2004 22:26:18 GMT
Checked in.  I'm pretty sure that the client gets stopped first.  I
think that what is happening is that undeploying trys to stop it again.


Regards,
Alan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dain Sundstrom [mailto:dsundstrom@gluecode.com]
> Sent: Sunday, September 12, 2004 1:40 PM
> To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Deployment heirarchies
> 
> Alan,
> 
>  From the log you sent me the other day, it looked to me like you were
> stopping a parent config and then trying to stop a child, which won't
> work since it is already stopped due to the dependency manager.
> 
> Is your current stuff checked in?
> 
> -dain
> 
> On Sep 12, 2004, at 8:42 AM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
> 
> > Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> >
> >> The reason that I ask is that in itests I distribute and start
app1A,
> >> app1B, and app2A.  I then try to stop and undeploy them in reverse
> >> order.  When I do this, app1A, app1B and app2A throw this exception
> >> when
> >> they are undeployed:
> >> java.lang.IllegalStateException
> >>         at
> >>
org.apache.geronimo.kernel.Kernel.stopConfiguration(Kernel.java:327)
> >> ...
> >
> > That looks like a bug.
> >
> >> Does what I'm doing for these unit tests, undeploying them in
reverse
> >> order, even make sense?
> >
> > If they are peers, then you should be able to stop them in any
order.
> > If they form a hierarchy, then stopping just the parent would be
> > sufficient as it would stop all the children as well.
> >
> >> BTW, what configuration to I pass to tell the server to stop the
whole
> >> tree all at once?  Do I have to stop the nodes that I started in
> >> reverse
> >> order?
> >
> > Stopping a configuration will stop all of its children first. So,
from
> > the tree above, stopping "Config1" will also stop "app1A" and
"app2A".
> > You could kill the whole tree by stopping "System" but that would
stop
> > all the management and communication GBeans leaving you with a
zombied
> > kernel.
> >
> > For stopping groups of applications the intention was to have
> > application defined units (like "Config1") so address this.
> >
> > --
> > Jeremy
> 



Mime
View raw message