geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <david_jen...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: Dual ActiveMQ configuration style [WAS: Add tomcat-specific configuration]
Date Thu, 15 Jan 2009 08:39:59 GMT

On Jan 14, 2009, at 6:05 PM, Ivan wrote:

> One way may be write a new property holder bean to replace the  
> default one in the current activemq,xml file (I remember David has  
> mentioned it in the last related thread).

I think this is the best option.  I think it will be useful for all  
the spring based projects we integrate or want to integrate (such as  
apacheds, jetspeed 2, roller, .....)

>  Another way I could see is that in the BrokerServiceGBean or  
> ConnectorGBean, before we start the broker service, we could add the  
> portoff to the port numbers (suppose we should get the portoffset  
> from somewhere) that the users input. However, we should have a way  
> to let the user know that the portoffset will be added to the port  
> numbers they input, or I guess it will make them feel confusion, for  
> when they input the number, what they expect is that a connector  
> will listen on the port they input.
>

I don't like this way of proceeding.  I think it forces a lot too much  
configuration code into the components.

> By the way, currently in the ActiveMQ plugins do not have any  
> implementation codes about adding and removing connectors.

I could be very wrong but got the impression talking to Hiram some  
time ago that changing connectors while the broker is running is not a  
good idea.   If I'm wrong we might want to wrap the connectors in  
gbeans... I don't know how complicated their configuration is.

thanks
david jencks

>
> 2009/1/15 David Jencks <david_jencks@yahoo.com>
>
> On Jan 14, 2009, at 3:10 AM, Gianny Damour wrote:
>
> Hi David,
>
> Your post is opportunistic for me to raise some concerns on dual  
> configuration style, one via GBean and another one via the native  
> configuration mechanism, which may cause trouble to users.
>
> No more than a couple of hours ago, I was trying to make sense of a  
> port conflict related to the ActiveMQ Broker trying to bind to the  
> same port whatever the value of PortOffSet. I figured out that I had  
> to change the port configuration in the activemq.xml configuration  
> file of the instance I was trying to start. The typical user  
> expectation is that PortOffset should be honored whatever the  
> configuration style.
>
> I do not have a solution; though I wanted to report on this bad  
> experience.
>
> You are not the first to run into this brick wall :-)
>
> I couldn't figure out any way to give spring a map or properties  
> object to use in property substitution.  All the solutions spring  
> offers appear to read directly from files.  Do you have any ideas on  
> how to fix this?
>
> thanks
> david jencks
>
>
>
>
> Thanks,
> Gianny
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: David Jencks <david_jencks@yahoo.com>
> Date: 14 January 2009 7:18:59 PM
> To: user@geronimo.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Add tomcat-specific configuration
> Reply-To: user@geronimo.apache.org
>
>
> On Jan 13, 2009, at 8:32 PM, Ivan wrote:
>
> I was always thinking that shall we have a better way to handle all  
> the available setting provided by the third-party modules? As we all  
> know, usually, all the GBeans only delegate those important and  
> popular settings, it is impossible for us to allow all the  
> configurations could be done via GBean.  Let us take Tomcat as an  
> example, maybe we shall give an interface to set those  
> configurations that we do not provide now.
>
> I think we could expose all the knobs on tomcat components in our  
> gbeans but it might not be the most usable approach.  Basically the  
> problem is that we have two component containers -- tomcat and  
> geronimo -- both of which insist on creating all the components  
> themselves.  While I tend to think that the main problem is that  
> tomcat mixes the lifecycle and runtime code to intimately the only  
> realistic way to get farther than we have now is to change geronimo  
> so the components don't have to be created directly by the gbean  
> infrastructure.
>
> david jencks
>
>
>
> 2009/1/14 Jack Cai <greensight@gmail.com>
> Thanks Ivan! I've examined the geronimo-tomcat-2.0.1.xsd and  
> geronimo-tomcat-config-1.0.xsd, and am pretty sure many  
> configurations are not available, like antiJARLocking, unloadDelay,  
> etc. I understand that many of these settings might not work in  
> Geronimo. Just try to see how we can play with the context.xml etc.,  
> which might be some good tips for migration from Tomcat.
>
> -Jack
>
> 2009/1/14 Ivan <xhhsld@gmail.com>
>
> Basically, Geronimo have created a GBean for each element in the  
> server.xml, which means we should configure those settings via  
> GBeans in the config.xml. But so far, I am sure the existing GBeans  
> have not covered all the settings that tomcat provides. e.g. for  
> server.xml, we have host gbean for the <HOST> element, actually, you  
> could check the current setting in the geronimo\plugins\tomcat 
> \tomcat6\src\main\plan\plan.xml. For the context.xml, a  
> TomcatWebAppContext GBean will be created while deploying the web  
> applications, and most configurations could be set in the geronimo- 
> web.xml file.
> Thanks for any comment, if any mistake is made, please point it out !
>
> 2009/1/13 Jack Cai <greensight@gmail.com>
>
> I just realize that I can put a context.xml in var/catalina/conf so  
> that I can specify lots of Tomcat options there. I did a small  
> experiment with the "workDir" param and it seems taking effect.  
> Wondering whether this is supposed to work? Can I also put a  
> server.xml there? Thanks!
>
> - Jack
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Ivan
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Ivan
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Ivan


Mime
View raw message