To seek for a new alternative for clustering may require more work, for WADI clustering on web side, IIRC, it uses Valve to copy session information by multicast or unicast, considering that Tomcat plugin still supports most of those related configurations, I am thinking that may be only a few changes may require to enable the session copying, has anyone tried that ?

2012/4/7 Russell E Glaue <>

On 04/06/2012 10:11 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:

On Apr 6, 2012, at 10:47 AM, Russell E Glaue wrote:

On 04/05/2012 02:49 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:

On Apr 5, 2012, at 9:50 AM, Russell E Glaue wrote:

"Clustering features are not available in the current 3.0-beta branch, so add some profiles to not build it, thus save the build time."

Is commit 1309635 related to this?

Is someone able to explain why WADI Clustering and Plugin Farming are not available in the 3.0-beta branch? Is it broken?

Hi Russell,
The WADI project seems to be largely dormant. Without anyone willing to bring the function forward, I don't think anyone has looked at trying to get it to work on a 3.0 base.

Is WADI important to you?


I'm wanting to get Geronimo up in my employer's web farms, and finally getting multiple instance support was a huge step forward for me. But now removing support for clustering is a step backward. We had been planning on its use.

Some mechanism is important to anyone who wants web user sessions to have persistence among multiple clustered/loadbalanced Geronimo servers. And we have had (used to anyway) lots of conversations on the importance of Geronimo clustering capabilities and how to do it.

Yes.., we can use other 3rd party like Terracotta, but that does not make Geronimo enterprise-ready out-of-the-box. And the terracotta plugin is probably not updated for 3.0.

If we remove WADI support, will we replace it with some other mechanism to share web user sessions among Geronimo instances? Or will we tell users to rely on tomcat's and jetty's native session replication and management? This alternative will not be a clean configuration, since the changes would have manually to go into tomcat and jetty server config files - not deployed as plans.

OK. So, for session replication, most people that I know of use Tomcat native clustering ( Does that not work for you? If we can go into specific issues, that would be great...

Great conversation to be having. Thanks!


Please correct me if I am wrong,

Is not the WADI support providing one configuration for clustering all deployed tomcat containers in a single Geronimo instance?

But if we use the tomcat default clustering support, we have to configure it on a per-container basis, even when multiple containers operate in the same Geronimo run-time instance? -- So it I have five containers configured in a single instance, each will have to be configured individually for clustering.

The prior WADI support shares the session clustering among all containers, and the later requires each container to instantiate its own independent clustering - which is more overhead when compared to the prior option.

I'm not necessarily a big supporter of WADI, and am definitely ready to accept alternatives. I would just like there to be a comparably good and well documented alternative - even if it is me writing the documentation, which I am willing.

I agree that having to support WADI integration in Geronimo source is more work when the typical user will be fine with, and probably prefer, the default Tomcat clustering. Especially with the WADI project not being active.

Now having discussed the benefits of WADI as a better geronimo solution, do we have a desire to provide that level of benefit with some alternate solution that can be used in place of WADI?

I appreciate this discussion. I want to continue to keep Enterprise Geronimo Usability at the top of the discussion list.