geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From John Sisson <jrsis...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Shutdown scripts
Date Fri, 11 Nov 2005 21:20:34 GMT
Hi Dave,

I don't think I had any objections to making the startup scripts follow 
Tomcat as much as possible.  See the following discussions on scripts, I 
think there were a number of issues discussed that we need to cover:

http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@geronimo.apache.org/msg05926.html

http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@geronimo.apache.org/msg05851.html

http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@geronimo.apache.org/msg06483.html

Regards,

John


Dave Colasurdo wrote:
> 
> 
> Jeff Genender wrote:
> 
>>
>>
>> Dave Colasurdo wrote:
>>
>>> The shutdown scripts are a step forward in usability over manually 
>>> killing the java process via CTL-C.  While quite simple, CTL-C does 
>>> not seem very user friendly and should not be the default mechanism.
>>
>>
>>
>> I really don't believe there is a default mechanism, IMHO.  I think we 
>> are offering multiple ways to do the same thing.  The CTRL-C would be 
>> heavily used by developers.  The shutdown script could be used by 
>> people using a daemon or backgrounding the server (which is easily 
>> done on both Windows and *nix systems) or a remote server.  The 
>> console would/maybe be used by mouse-clicking administrators.
>>
>> I would surely hope that in a prod environment one is not running the 
>> server in a terminal window ;-)
>>
>>>
>>> However, it does seem strange that a user needs to open a new window 
>>> to shutdown the server.   Seems like the initial startup command 
>>> should return the  command prompt back to the user so that shutdown 
>>> can be issued from the same window.  One way to accomplish this is to 
>>> have the startup script launch a new window that controls the java 
>>> process (and output the startup messages) while the initial prompt is 
>>> returned to the user.  This would allow the shutdown to be issued 
>>> from the initial window.
>>
>>
>>
>> For a developer (and me being selfish), running in a terminal window 
>> is not strange and it seems to be the norm from a command line 
>> perspective, rather than the exception.
>>
>> IMHO, ss a developer, sending the server into the background is not 
>> appealing.  I think if one wants control over their terminal, they 
>> could issue a startup.sh& (notice the ampersand) to background the 
>> process. Quite possibly we could also add another script called 
>> startup_background.sh (or bat) that could so this as well.   We could 
>> also create daemon scripts for the different platforms.  Wasn't there 
>> a JIRA issue for an NT Service for Windows?  We could add init.d 
>> scripts for Unix too.
>>
> 
> I agree the current behavior is appropriate for a developer.  I was 
> thinking more about end users. Similar to your suggestion, should we 
> consider adding an option to the startup.sh|bat script to put the 
> process in background?  Actually, I'm wondering if the default behavior 
> (startup.sh|bat w/o any options) should be geared toward end users and 
> would run the process in background.  And specifying the option 
> (-foreground) would allow the process to be run in the current window 
> for developers.
> 
> Of course, windows service and init.d are also useful.  I think both 
> proposals are worth pursuing
> 
> Will look to see if there are current JIRAs open on these..
> 
> 
>>>
>>> Also, if we ever support sharing one binary installation that can 
>>> start multiple instances of geronimo (each with it's own unique 
>>> configuration) then we will also likely need this behavior.
>>>
>>> -Dave-
>>
>>
>>
>>
> 

Mime
View raw message