geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Genender <jgenen...@apache.org>
Subject Re: -1 on checkin of 368344 was Re: [wadi-dev] Clustering: WADI/Geronimo integrations.
Date Sat, 14 Jan 2006 15:20:10 GMT
+1.  This is really great stuff.

Jeff

Jules Gosnell wrote:
> OK, Folks - here is how I see it -
> 
> Everyone knows that they are right and the other guy is wrong.
> 
> Result - DEADLOCK - everyone loses.
> 
> Solution - release locks, back off, coordinate, retry.
> 
> Releasing locks involves us all making concessions :
> 
> I suggest -
> 
> Jan, Greg and I conceded that Jeff could have been more involved in
> discussion before this change went in.
> Jeff concedes that Jan, Greg and I should have been involved in
> discussion before he backed the change out.
> We all agree to overlook all current technical differences.
> We all agree to put aside whatever bad feelings may have arisen from
> this incident.
> 
> OK - locks released, backing-off complete.
> 
> Now, coordination :
> 
> WADI side :
> 
> I will downgrade the log.info to a log.debug
> I will remove the axion dependency.
> I will resubmit the change as a patch to Jan and Jeff.
> 
> Jetty/Tomcat side :
> Jan and Jeff will take this patch, and all relevant input.
> If they feel that they need further discussion, they will have it.
> They will implement a simple, unified solution to the issue for all
> existing cases and get it in to Geronimo 1.0.1
> 
> 
> I simply want a speedy, painless resolution so we can continue forward.
> 
> If everyone else is happy with these terms, then here is my '+1'
> 
> 
> Jules
> 
> 
> Jeff Genender wrote:
> 
>> Hi Jules.
>>
>> A few comments.  First, you made changes without discussing them on the
>> dev lists.
>>
>> As per the discussions in the past, both Aaron and David Jencks, as well
>> as I threw in our .02 on how to integrate the clustering.  I would
>> appreciate you discuss code ideas and changes that have such a drastic
>> impact on the Geronimo code base.  Here are the issues with your check
>> in:
>>
>> 1) I explained before for Jetty, and obviously now I need to do it for
>> Tomcat, a -1 on Axion as a dependency.  There should not be any web
>> application dependencies injected at the container level.  This means
>> there is a severe architectural issue with WADI when we are injecting
>> these dependencies into the container.
>>
>> 2) You hard coded in org.codehaus.wadi.tomcat55.TomcatManager as the
>> distributablesession manager in the TomcatContainer.  Hardcoding a
>> pluggable session engine is very bad, and defeats the pluggability of a
>> configuration that we requested.
>>
>> 3) You placed log.info() in the code, and Aaron worked pretty hard to
>> clean those up.
>>
>> 4) Your integration of setting the manager (no matter what) is a direct
>> clash with the
>>
>> Jules, I am giving a complete -1 of checkin of 368344.  These are all
>> for technical reasons.  Please back out these changes, and bring this
>> discussion to the Geronimo lists as this needs some significant
>> discussion for implementation.  I would appreciate that you please
>> involve the Apache way and open discussions on the lists before doing
>> this sort of thing in the future.
>>
>> Again, I will CC the G lists to make this clear, that I would like this
>> change backed out.
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>>
>> Jules Gosnell wrote:
>>  
>>
>>> Here is a list of outstanding issues associated with this work:
>>>
>>> - ActiveMQ's shutdown hook seems to trigger when Geronimo is shutdown,
>>> removing AMQ before WADI - WADI doesn't like this. I have added a
>>> property to the node.sh script which suppresses this behaviour. I will
>>> document it in the Getting Started doc.
>>>
>>> - There 'may' be issues with nodes finding each other, when a Geronimo
>>> node is introduced into a WADI cluster - investigating.
>>>
>>> - Jeff - you should look over the changes and make sure that they do not
>>> impact on any other TC fn-ality. They were done with Emacs, so the
>>> formatting may be offensive. Please feel free to make them your own and
>>> bring any issues back to the list. The WADIGBean, is no longer used, so
>>> you may want to remove this from the repo.
>>>
>>> - Jan and Jeff - since this config is now done on the container bean and
>>> not in the geronimo-web.xml, you may no longer need to implement your
>>> own geronimo-web.xml schemas (I haven't looked very closely at TC). You
>>> may want to consider this and perhaps lose them.
>>>
>>> - In order to get the same webapp to work in all containers
>>> (tomcat5[05], jetty[56], geronimo-[tomcat/jetty], jboss-tomcat), I had
>>> to move deps back to Geronimo container-level. These include Axion,
>>> which I know will upset Jeff. As I have stated before, WADI's dependence
>>> on Axion is easily removed. If Jeff or anyone wants to look at replacing
>>> it with Derby, it is fine with me, as long as they do some testing and
>>> confirm that having created a session on a single node and restarted it,
>>> the session survives (if the DB is still running). This needs to be
>>> tested on all supported containers. Axion was used because it is an
>>> in-VM DB (so imposes no further integration dependencies on the Getting
>>> Started stuff and is useful for unit-testing) and was in use by Geronimo
>>> at the time. So I suggest that any replacement needs to also be able to
>>> run in-vm aswell. As we go further and move WADI's actual configuration
>>> from the app to the container-level, these issues will disappear and
>>> WADI will be able to be hooked to whatever persistance mechanism is
>>> shipped in Geronimo by default.
>>>
>>> - Jan & Jeff , you may want to consider pushing some of this session
>>> manager selection code up into a shared GeronimoWebContainer abstraction
>>> so that you don't both end up maintaining similar but diverging code...
>>>
>>> - I may have overlooked a couple of issues. If I come across them, I
>>> shall post them.
>>>
>>> Further work on Geronimo integration :
>>>
>>> - more testing
>>> - make a new WADI release and update geronimo-trunk to use it
>>> - look at applying diffs to a G1.0 tree and producing a binary patch for
>>> 1.0 distros.
>>> - update website and release it
>>>
>>>
>>> Jules
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Jules Gosnell wrote:
>>>
>>>   
>>>> Guys,
>>>>
>>>> Jan and I have just refactored the Geronimo Jetty and Tomcat
>>>> integrations to take the same approach to the installation of a 3rd
>>>> party session manager, to ease the integration of WADI. This is now
>>>> checked in on Geronimo's trunk.
>>>>
>>>> Each top level web container GBean now supports a pair of attributes -
>>>> LocalSessionManager and DistributableSessionManager. These may be used
>>>> to override the container's choice of SessionManager for webapps with
>>>> and without the <distributable/> tag present in the WEB-INF/web.xml,
>>>> respectively.
>>>>
>>>> The attributes expect to be given a classname, if required, this class
>>>> will be loaded and instantiated. The resulting instance will be used
>>>> as the session manager. If not provided, the container will use a
>>>> sensible default. Currently Jetty and TC are set up to use their own
>>>> default session managers in the local case and the correct WADI
>>>> session manager in the distributable case.
>>>>
>>>> This means that the same WADI-enabled webapp, with its plan held
>>>> internally (WEB-INF/geronimo-web.xml) may now be hot-deployed on
>>>> either a Jetty or a Tomcat based Geronimo, without changes :-)
>>>>
>>>> I will post specific WADI issues to the WADI dev lists
>>>> (wadi-dev@incubator.apache.org, dev@wadi.codehaus.org).
>>>>
>>>> This shouldn't be seen as a final position on the subject - there is
>>>> still much to talk about, but is a useful interim step, that allows us
>>>> to have something working whilst we figure out how to go forward.
>>>>
>>>> Enjoy,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Jules
>>>>
>>>>     
>>>   
> 
> 

Mime
View raw message