geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sachin Patel <sppat...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [LONG] Re: Startup Scripts - foreground and background
Date Mon, 21 Nov 2005 15:05:50 GMT
One immediate concern I have is the server shutting down whenever any 
configuration fails to start.  This is ok for criticial system 
configurations, but do we want the same behavior for user apps? Do we 
want to consider a temporary solution for now to possibly include a 
"--force" parameter that continues starting the server after a failure?

Sachin

hogstrom wrote:
> +1 on the ideas John.  You might consider where the server name would 
> go when we migrate to multiple configurations.  For instance:
>
> ./startup.sh server1 or
> ./shutdown.sh server1
>
> I wonder where the right place for the PIDs would be?  Probably in a 
> $G/var/servers directory so one could map a server name to a PID?  I 
> know this is a future item but we're going to get there pretty sooon 
> (after the 10th :)
>
> I also like David's idea on the status after initialization that shows 
> how long each element took to initialize.
>
> Matt
>
>
> John Sisson wrote:
>
>> I am reviewing Dave's startup patches ( GERONIMO-1166 ) and have a 
>> couple of ideas for comment.
>> [1]. I propose we provide a geronimo.sh file that is modelled on 
>> Tomcat's catalina.sh file ( 
>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/container/tc5.5.x/catalina/src/bin/ 
>> ), as a large number of users would already be familiar with its 
>> syntax and environment variable naming conventions and it would be 
>> good if we had some consistency across Apache products.
>> geronimo.sh would support options such as:
>>
>> jpda start    - Start Geronimo under JPDA debugger
>> run             - Start Geronimo in the current window (same as 
>> Dave's proposed -foreground)
>> start           - Start Geronimo in a separate window (same as Dave's 
>> proposed -background)
>>
>> Also make startup.sh consistent with Tomcat's startup.sh and move the 
>> redirection logic and foreground/background logic to geronimo.sh.
>>
>> If we are consistent with Tomcat it means that if an option isn't 
>> passed to geronimo.sh (e.g. start) then usage information will be 
>> printed to the terminal. If users invoke startup.sh, it in turn 
>> invokes geronimo.sh with the start option (consistent with Tomcat).
>>
>> I am happy to make these changes if I have no objections.
>>
>> [2]. File name used for redirected output when using startup.sh 
>> -background
>>
>>    Currently the patch redirects output to a startupProgress.log 
>> file. I am thinking the file should be renamed to geronimo.out 
>> (consistent with Tomcat's catalina.out) since it may contain more 
>> than startup messages over the life of the process.
>>
>> [3]. Improving format of progress messages in redirected output when 
>> using startup.sh -background
>>
>> For the startup output to not appear garbled in the file that output 
>> is redirected to (due to the carriage returns generated by 
>> ProgressBarStartupMonitor) we probably need a modified version of 
>> ProgressBarStartupMonitor that outputs a line when a configuration is 
>> starting/started (without the update thread that updates the line 
>> approx every 500ms that the ProgressBarStartupMonitor has).
>>
>> I initially thought we could use the -quiet option, but that results 
>> in no progress being output and it would be nice to be able to look 
>> at the geronimo.out file to see what is happening rather than having 
>> to look through possibly heaps of messages in the log4j log files.
>>
>> It would be also be helpful if the output redirected to the 
>> geronimo.out file also has the summary of listening ports and started 
>> application modules & web applications.
>> [4]. Proposed new Geronimo startup options:
>>
>> -interactive (default)
>>        Specify this when output is sent to an interactive 
>> terminal/console.  During startup (if -quiet is not specified) the 
>> progress message for a configuration will be updated approx every 
>> 500ms (using carriage returns to move the cursor on the display to 
>> the beginning of the current line to enable the progress message to 
>> be updated.  Mutually exclusive with the -noninteractive parameter.
>>
>> -noninteractive
>>        Specify this when output is being redirected to a file or 
>> printer.  During startup, a new message (each message on a new line) 
>> will be issued during different stages startup. Mutually exclusive 
>> with the -interactive parameter.
>>
>> The above option could also be stored in case in the future we want 
>> to enhance shutdown processing to show some progress messages.
>>
>> The startup.sh script would pass -noninteractive if the process is 
>> started in the background.
>>
>> [5]. New method on StartupMonitor interface
>>
>> A new method setInteractive(boolean b) could be added to the 
>> StartupMonitor interface and invoked by the Daemon class before the 
>> systemStarted(kernel) method is called.
>>
>> Comments?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> John
>>
>> Dave Colasurdo wrote:
>>
>>> Have attached the patches for both unix (.sh) and windows (.bat) 
>>> environments to GERONIMO-1166. Please test them out..
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> -Dave-
>>>
>>>
>>> Dave Colasurdo wrote:
>>>
>>>> I've opened a JIRA for this issue and created a patch for the 
>>>> windows platform.  Still investigating the unix environment...
>>>>
>>>>  http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1166
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> John Sisson wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> 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