geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dain Sundstrom <dsundst...@gluecode.com>
Subject Re: Tomcat Module Still Broken
Date Wed, 08 Dec 2004 01:05:25 GMT
The problem is tomcat and jetty have fundamentally different designs 
and architectures, so any abstraction would limit both.  The nice thing 
about the gbean architecture is it was designed to allows components to 
not agree on a common design.

Regardless of this discussion, I don't think we want to ship two huge 
web servers in the geronimo distribution.  My guess is this will add at 
least 15 megs to the distribution.

-dain

--
Dain Sundstrom
Chief Architect
Gluecode Software
310.536.8355, ext. 26

On Dec 7, 2004, at 4:00 PM, Azfar Kazmi wrote:

> Does it make sense to add an abstraction layer on top of web container
> (WebContainer, JettyWebContainerImpl, TomcatWebContainerImpl, etc),
> let a factory decide (upon run) which container is declared by user.
>
> This way, user will be able to choose the container without a rebuild.
> (Which users do not like to do.)
>
> I am still trying to understand the gbean architecture so don't know
> how it may or may not fit.
>
> -Azfar
>
> On Tue, 7 Dec 2004 14:08:15 -0800, Dain Sundstrom
> <dsundstrom@gluecode.com> wrote:
>> On Dec 7, 2004, at 1:05 PM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Dain Sundstrom wrote:
>>>> Currently there is only one deployer slot available for each module
>>>> type of an EAR.  The following snippit from the  shows the EAR
>>>> deployer  configuration
>>>> <gbean
>>>> name="geronimo.deployer:role=Builder,type=EAR,config=org/apache/
>>>> geronimo/J2EEDeployer"
>>>>         
>>>> class="org.apache.geronimo.j2ee.deployment.EARConfigBuilder">
>>>>     <reference name="EJBConfigBuilder">some:object=name</reference>
>>>>     <reference name="WebConfigBuilder">some:object=name</reference>
>>>>     <reference
>>>> name="ConnectorConfigBuilder">some:object=name</reference>
>>>>     <reference
>>>> name="AppClientConfigBuilder">some:object=name</reference>
>>>> </gbean>
>>>> I strongly suggest that we only run one servlet engine in Geronimo.
>>>> Both Tomcat and Jetty are pretty large, so I think we should have
>>>> separate distributions for them.  Of course this would be easier if 
>>>> I
>>>>  had moved assembly last weekend.
>>>
>>> It means that I can't deploy a module to both containers and run only
>>> one, doesn't it? If so, a user has to decide ahead if (s)he wants to
>>> run tomcat or jetty, before deployment takes place, right? I've
>>> noticed that the order of deployer entries in the j2ee-deployer plan
>>> does matter, i.e. when there're two web deployers defined in the 
>>> plan,
>>> the later wins. Is it always true? Do you know about a solution to 
>>> not
>>> force a user to comment or uncomment a gbean configuration for a web
>>> builder?
>>
>> No.
>>
>> I know that running two web servers seems cool, but would any (sane)
>> user actually need (not want) to do this?  I feel that a reasonable
>> solution is to have separate distributions for tomcat and jetty.
>>
>> -dain
>>
>>


Mime
View raw message