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: Finishing up tomcat server.xml configuration work...
Date Tue, 14 Jul 2009 07:22:13 GMT

On Jul 14, 2009, at 12:08 AM, Ivan wrote:

>
>
> 2009/7/14 David Jencks <david_jencks@yahoo.com>
> Hi Jeff,
>
> I'm afraid our points of view are rather different.  I've added some  
> comments inline to try to explain my point of view.
>
> On Jul 13, 2009, at 11:14 PM, chi runhua wrote:
>
>> Before we start working on documentation, I'd like to confirm what  
>> I understood so far is correct.
>>
>> We have 2 different scenarios: (1) users are going to develop new  
>> applications but they are used to the tomcat way; (2) users have  
>> existing application running on Tomcat, we'd like to provide a  
>> seamless way migrating to Geronimo.
>>
>> For (1), We support server.xml now because we want users to use  
>> Geronimo in the same way they used to be as in Tomcat, such as  
>> connector configuration, security realm, log configuration, valve  
>> and deploy method as well; in this case,
>
> Connector configuration  and deployment in geronimo are still  
> completely different from tomcat.  Tomcat security realms won't  
> integrate with geronimo security.
>
>
>
>     What is the difference for the connector configuration between  
> Geronimo and Tomcat? Currently, all the connector configurations are  
> in the server.xml file.

I think I confused two possible meanings of "connector'.  I (now)  
imagine you and Jeff are thinking of the web listener coyote  
connectors which should definitely configured in server.xml.  For some  
reason -- it no longer makes any sense to me -- I was thinking of j2ca  
connectors, in particular database pools.

sorry for the confusion
david jencks

>     Ivan
>
>> Geronimo will take care of users' applications and provide run-time  
>> environment. Anyway, we will recommend users to adopt GBean usage  
>> for Web container configuration instead of using server.xml, which  
>> we can demostrate the up-sides of Geronimo architecture using app- 
>> per-port sample;
>
> The only reason I can see to configure a tomcat server using gbeans  
> rather than server.xml is if you have a legacy server configuration  
> that you don't want to convert.  In my view using a server.xml is a  
> lot more convenient than the individual gbeans.
>
>>
>> As for (2), users can simply copy their server.xml into /var/ 
>> catalina by overwriting the one in Geronimo,  and for example, user  
>> need to copy the applications to /var/catalina/web-apps/. There  
>> would be nothing different from the old days. Geronimo will provide  
>> run-time enviornment.
>
> I'd really prefer that we emphasize server assembly using geronimo  
> plugins rather than manual file copying.  The two ways I've thought  
> of so far for setting up a tomcat server is by replacing the tomcat  
> plugin we ship or by unpacking a server.xml from a plugin to  
> overwrite the server.xml we ship.  The second method seems  
> unreliable to me, what happens if you deploy 2 such plugins?
>
> I haven't checked but I hope that tomcat hot deployment doesn't  
> work.  IMO web apps should be deployed using a geronimo plan  
> basically as they are today.  If copying an app into a tomcat hot  
> deploy folder does work, the result won't relate to geronimo  
> services in any way (for instance jndi, transactions, security).
>
>
>>
>> In either scenario, users' apps will be untouched and cann't be  
>> used as geronimo plugin because they are still tomcat-specific.
>
> Web apps should still be deployed as plugins using a geronimo plan.   
> Otherwise they will not get any benefit from running in geronimo  
> rather than plain tomcat: they won't have access to geronimo jndi,  
> transactions, security, ejbs, or any other services.
>
>
> At the moment we don't support context.xml files.  It would be great  
> if we did but that would require quite a bit more work.
>
> thanks
> david jencks
>>
>> Anything incorrect, please hop in.
>>
>> thanks
>>
>> Jeff C
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 8:50 AM, David Jencks  
>> <david_jencks@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> IMO our way of configuring the tomcat server using server.xml is  
>> working fine and the main remaining bits are really documentation.   
>> Since I am terrible at documentation I hope others will take it  
>> upon themselves to help with it :-)
>>
>> I'd like to see
>>
>> -- a list of stuff that doesn't work in geronimo.  My recollection  
>> is that the main things that don't work are configuring jndi (such  
>> as deploying datasources) and realms (this might actually work, I'm  
>> not sure).
>>
>> -- at least one sample of how to use it.  I think a good starting  
>> point would the the app-per-port sample that shows how to have 2  
>> web apps each exposed on a different port.  This requires setting  
>> up 2 entire tomcat servers and I think would be a nice example of  
>> the simplicity of the server.xml configuration compared with the  
>> gbeans we used up till now.  I think I'd consider deploying the  
>> server.xml in a plugin that completely replaces the existing tomcat  
>> plugin.
>>
>> thoughts?
>>
>> many thanks
>> david jencks
>>
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Ivan


Mime
View raw message