geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Aaron Mulder" <ammul...@alumni.princeton.edu>
Subject Re: hot deployment directory
Date Thu, 04 May 2006 15:36:28 GMT
When you're working on that, you should be sure to test with several
types of modules -- one module with a fully-specified configId (group,
artifact, version, and type), one module without a configId, and one
module with a configId but no version in the configId -- it ought to
work all ways (and probably doesn't right now).

Thanks,
    Aaron

On 5/4/06, Rakesh Ranjan <rakesh.geronimo@gmail.com> wrote:
> Aaron, Thanks for clarification.
>  We will work without conflicting. I am going to touch the startup problem.
> I mean if a module kept in hot deployment directory is already deployed, the
> server should not deploy the module again during the startup. Currently the
> server try to deploy the module again and throws exception. i already
> created a JIRA ID (GERONIMO-1982) for this.
>
>  Rakesh Ranjan
>
>
> On 5/4/06, Aaron Mulder < ammulder@alumni.princeton.edu> wrote:
> > For purposes of the hot deployer functionality, forget that the SFHD
> > even exists.  It is a special case feature, and does not at all
> > replace what the hot deploy directory does.
> >
> > However, for purposes of updatng the hot deployer implementation, you
> > may want to refer to the SFHD implementation.
> >
> > I'll probably be touching the hot deployer to add a feature so that if
> > an app is undeployed some other way the hot deployer will delete it
> > from its directory.  Hopefully we can both work on this without
> > conflicting, since we'll be looking at different aspects of it.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >     Aaron
> >
> > On 5/4/06, Rakesh Ranjan < rakesh.geronimo@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Thanks Joe.
> > >
> > >  Still i have some confusions.
> > >
> > >  Is SFHD the substitute for the DirectoryHotDeployer ? If it is
> substitute,
> > > then do we need to disable the hotdeployment GBean for the working of
> SFHD?
> > >  What is the meaning of "It monitors just one directory for one
> deployable
> > > element" ?
> > >
> > >  Rakesh Ranjan
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 5/4/06, Joe Bohn < joe.bohn@earthlink.net > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > SFHD is similar to hot deployer but has these differences:
> > > >
> > > > - It is not an integrated part of the server itself.   It is a gbean
> > > > itself that must be deployed into the server to use it.
> > > > - It only takes action when the SFHD gbean is started (which is
> > > > typically during server startup).   Hot Deploy monitors files for
> > > > changes at any time.
> > > > - It monitors just one directory for one deployable element
> > > > - It controls the life-cycle of the element it deploys.   I'm not sure
> > > > if hot deploy does this as well.  For example, a war deployed via this
> > > > mechanism is not added to the server config.xml for auto-start.
> > > >
> > > > You might want to consider my patches to SFHD as well included in
> > > > geronmio-1946
> > > http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1946 .
> > > > These haven't been blessed by Dain yet so they may change some.
> > > >
> > > > Joe
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Rakesh Ranjan wrote:
> > > > > Can anybody please tell me the purpose of SingleFileHotDeploy
> service.
> > > > > Is it same as the purpose of hot deployment directory?
> > > > >
> > > > > Rakesh Ranjan
> > > > >
> > > > > On 5/4/06, *Dain Sundstrom* < dain@iq80.com <mailto: dain@iq80.com>>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >     I suggest you start by reading the SingleFileHotDeploy service
I
> > > > >     wrote last week.  It uses the most recent apis.
> > > > >
> > > > >     -dain
> > > > >
> > > > >     On May 3, 2006, at 10:30 PM, Rakesh Ranjan wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >      > I have seen the same problems with Geronimo-1.1-SNAPSHOT
> also. So
> > > i
> > > > >      > will create JIRA ID for these two issues and start working.
> > > > >      > Rakesh Ranjan
> > > > >      >
> > > > >      > On 5/4/06, Aaron Mulder <ammulder@alumni.princeton.edu
> > > > >     <mailto: ammulder@alumni.princeton.edu>> wrote:
> > > > >      > Please do any work in the 1.1 branch.  Right now 1.2 is
in a
> very
> > > > >      > uncertain state.  Though, I suspect the issues will be
> different
> > > in
> > > > >      > 1.1, so you may want to start by testing the same things
> there.
> > > > >      >
> > > > >      > IIRC, the hot deployer does not yet check the timestamp
of
> the
> > > > >      > deployments in it its directory during startup and compare
> those
> > > to
> > > > >      > the timestamps of the current modules to determine whether
an
> > > > >     existing
> > > > >      > file there is the same as ever or a new version was copied
in
> > > while
> > > > >      > the server was down.  That should be doable in 1.1.
> > > > >      >
> > > > >      > Thanks,
> > > > >      >     Aaron
> > > > >      >
> > > > >      > On 5/4/06, Rakesh Ranjan < rakesh.geronimo@gmail.com
> > > > >     <mailto: rakesh.geronimo@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > > > >      > > Thanks Aaron for the quick response.
> > > > >      > >  Here are two issues with Geronimo-1.2-SNAPSHOT which
need
> to
> > > be
> > > > >      > fixed :
> > > > >      > >  1. When Geronimo starts, it try to deploy the modules
in
> the
> > > hot
> > > > >      > deployment
> > > > >      > > directory even if that module is already deployed.
Since
> the
> > > > >      > application is
> > > > >      > > already deployed, it throws an error : the application
> already
> > > > >      > exists in the
> > > > >      > > server.
> > > > >      > >
> > > > >      > >  2. Geronimo is not able to deploy the database plans
kept
> in
> > > the
> > > > >      > hot
> > > > >      > > deployment directory.
> > > > >      > >
> > > > >      > >  Rakesh Ranjan
> > > > >      > >
> > > > >      > >
> > > > >      > > On 5/4/06, Aaron Mulder < ammulder@alumni.princeton.edu
> > > > >     <mailto: ammulder@alumni.princeton.edu>> wrote:
> > > > >      > > > You're welcome to look at that.  Can you list
the issues
> > > you're
> > > > >      > going
> > > > >      > > > to attempt to fix?  There seems to be a lot of
variation
> in
> > > what
> > > > >      > > > people think the problems actually are.
> > > > >      > > >
> > > > >      > > > Thanks,
> > > > >      > > >     Aaron
> > > > >      > > >
> > > > >      > > > On 5/4/06, Rakesh Ranjan < rakesh.geronimo@gmail.com
> > > > >     <mailto: rakesh.geronimo@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > > > >      > > > > Hi all,
> > > > >      > > > >
> > > > >      > > > >  I have not seen much activity in hot deployment
> directory
> > > > >      > enhancement.
> > > > >      > > I
> > > > >      > > > > have seen there are some bugs in the current
> implementation
> > > > >      > of hot
> > > > >      > > > > deployment directory. I am interested to
work on this
> > > > >      > enhancement. So i
> > > > >      > > want
> > > > >      > > > > to know the current status of this enhancement?
Is some
> > > other
> > > > >      > member
> > > > >      > > working
> > > > >      > > > > on this issue?
> > > > >      > > > >
> > > > >      > > > >  Rakesh
> > > > >      > > > >
> > > > >      > > >
> > > > >      > >
> > > > >      > >
> > > > >      >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Joe Bohn
> > > > joe.bohn at earthlink.net
> > > >
> > > > "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep, to gain what he cannot
> > > > lose."   -- Jim Elliot
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>

Mime
View raw message