Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of jgenender@savoirtech.com
 designates 209.181.65.237 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <435F9EE0.20902@savoirtech.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 09:21:04 -0600
From: Jeff Genender <jgenender@savoirtech.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Macintosh/20050317)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
Subject: Re: Clustering
References: <434F9B0C.3030408@savoirtech.com> <434FAC1A.8010704@earthlink.net>
 <434FBAC6.3000009@apache.org>
 <1496C1D3-8F29-42AA-B1BF-791E8A9EF094@apache.org>
 <434FFBA1.3050600@savoirtech.com> <435E2729.1050908@earthlink.net>
 <435E34A2.9070809@savoirtech.com> <435E85AE.7030506@earthlink.net>
 <435E8723.7070308@savoirtech.com> <435F8C25.3050606@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <435F8C25.3050606@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Ok...when I wake up from my dream...

Surely I must be dreaming...we are getting people lining up to help on 
the doc??

I need to pinch myself!

;-)

Thanks so much for stepping up to help with this.

Jeff

Hernan Cunico wrote:
> Hi guys,
> Apache wiki definitively needs some reorganization, better structure and 
> higher flexibility for formating.
> 
> I have been working some articles in confluence which has better 
> formating and way much easier than Apache wiki.
> 
> It would be really cool if we can continue to submit documentation in 
> confluence and, eventually, turn confluence into the default (and 
> totally renewed) G wiki.
> 
> Dave & Jeff, pls let me know how can I help.
> 
> Cheers!
> Hernan
> 
> 
> Jeff Genender wrote:
> 
>>
>>
>> Dave Colasurdo wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Jeff Genender wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dave Colasurdo wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I'm still trying to understand the current web-tier clustering 
>>>>> support available in geronimo.
>>>>>
>>>>> Have the clustering GBeans been added for the Tomcat container?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have them fully coded.  I just need to test them and check them in.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks... Please keep us posted on progress.  Am eager to test this 
>>> out..
>>
>>
>>
>> I am on it...
>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Any setup documentation available for testing G web-tier clustering 
>>>>> using Tomcat?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not at the moment.  Would you be interested in helping out with 
>>>> getting info on the wiki after I check this in?
>>>>
>>> Yep, can help out here..
>>>
>>> BTW, I think the whole G Wiki needs a facelift.. I'm also hoping 
>>> Hernan can help out here.
>>
>>
>>
>> +1000!!! This would be most excellent.
> 
> 
> 
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What is the G web-tier clustering story related to Jetty?  Any 
>>>>> setup documentation available?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We are actually talking about using WADI (wadi.codehaus.org) to do 
>>>> this.  This way Jetty and Tomcat can share the web tier in a 
>>>> cluster.  This is primarily why I have held off checking in the 
>>>> Tomcat clustering.
>>>>
>>> Does this mean that a single cluster can consist of both G Jetty and 
>>> G Tomcat cluster members?  Hmmm..  I usually think of cluster members 
>>> as identical clones.  Or are you saying that both Jetty and Tomcat 
>>> would share the same WADI mechanism for clustering though not support 
>>> a heterogeneous set of web containers across servers?
>>
>>
>>
>> I'll let Jules comment on this.  But yes, IIUC, the cluster 
>> theoretically should be able to have both Jetty and Tomcat members.  
>> The clustering is really only the HTTPSession, so in theory this 
>> should not be an issue.  Jules, care to comment here?
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Has anyone tested Tangosol Coherence with G?  Any setup 
>>>>> documentation available?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>> -Dave-
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Jeff Genender wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Speaking from a Tomcat perspective, I just need to add the  
>>>>>>>> clustering GBeans and it should be available immediately.  But 
>>>>>>>> this  only addresses the web tier, which is not good enough.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's great - are you kidding? :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I know...but I didn't want to implement it as a half-way 
>>>>>> clustering deal.  Its great but not what we need at the end of the 
>>>>>> day.  In any case...the community wants it, so the community shall 
>>>>>> have it.  I am working on it now.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jeff
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>