ofbiz-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tim Ruppert <tim.rupp...@hotwaxmedia.com>
Subject Re: Multiple OFBiz instances running on a single machine
Date Tue, 02 Jun 2009 12:35:59 GMT
I have to admit to not being the biggest fan of virtualization myself for just about the same
reasons (not that I think I'm right - just that I've been burned before, so I stay away from
that hot flame!).  We maintain as many as 30 OFBiz instances on our staging server (not all
on at the same time :) ) and do the same in production, without virtualization, for many of
those same servers.  I don't think it's a pain in the ass, it's only a thorough understanding
of how you bind instances to domain names and ports - which is super common for OFBiz applications.

Sure you need to keep up on your patch files (one per instance should be plenty) - but that's
just part of being part of the community and shouldn't be a gigantic deal since you're already
showing a propensity to stay active.  I can't remember exactly where the documentation file
is that documents all of the ports - but I know it's done in relatively good detail and lays
out the process pretty clearly.  

Anyways, if this is something that you don't want to do yourself, but have your host do, you
could also look into Contegix as a hosting provider - they've got this all dialed and you
personally wouldn't have to do much of it.  Just a thought.  Good luck on your hunt and looking
forward to hearing when you've gotten it all squared away for you and your customers.

Cheers,
Tim
--
Tim Ruppert
HotWax Media
http://www.hotwaxmedia.com

o:801.649.6594
f:801.649.6595

----- "Deyan Tsvetanov" <deyan.tsvetanov@ittconsult.com> wrote:

> Hi Vince, 
> 
> yes, I have considered virtualisation but I have concluded that I
> don't
> really need virtualisation :)
> 
> I don't want to shoot flies with a gun for elephants ( a humble
> interpretation attempt :)
> 
> I would have preferred virtualisation if I need
> - OS process level isolation 
> - kernel level isolation 
> - file system level isolation
> - if I ran software which does not support multiple instances because
> of
> shared resources or something else. 
> 
> Currently all I need is network level isolation. I want to give VPN
> access to the customers so they can see *ONLY* their own OFBiz
> instance.
> So if I start an OFBiz instance bound only ( for example ) to
> 192.168.1.1 then I will be able to create a VPN network
> 192.168.1.1/24. 
> 
> The other way is to create a complex system of forwarded ports which
> is
> a real pain in the a** to maintain. 
> 
> -- deyan 
> 
> On Mon, 2009-06-01 at 12:19 -0500, Vince Clark wrote:
> > Deyan
> > 
> > I'm curious to know why you are running multiple instances in this
> way. Have you considered virtualisation?
> > 
> > 
> > Vince Clark 
> > vclark@globalera.com 
> > (303) 493-6723 
> > 
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Deyan Tsvetanov" <deyan.tsvetanov@ittconsult.com>
> > To: user@ofbiz.apache.org
> > Sent: Monday, June 1, 2009 9:58:41 AM GMT -07:00 US/Canada Mountain
> > Subject: Re: Multiple OFBiz instances running on a single machine
> > 
> > Hi again, 
> > 
> > I'm sorry for delaying the thread, I was pretty busy the last few
> > days ... 
> > 
> > It happens :)
> > 
> > So back to the discussion: 
> > As I mentioned *ALL* the containers can be configured which network
> > interfaces to bind to: ajp ( 8009 ), http ( 8080 ), https ( 8443 ),
> iiop
> > ( 2000 ). The only container that does not support this type of
> > configuration is the NamingContainer
> > ( OFBIZ_HOME/framework/base/config/ofbiz-containers.xml ) .
> > 
> > Why is it a pain for me ? Because I am running each OFBiz instance
> into
> > a different VLAN. Why ? Because I have configured VPN access for
> each
> > VLAN. And that's not the only reason. I would really like to know
> that
> > 1099 is RMI, 8009 is AJP. 
> > 
> > The only thing that breaks my VLAN schema is the NamingContainer,
> which
> > binds to *:1099 ( all the available interfaces ). 
> > 
> > I provided a patch which fixes that injustice and brings everything
> to
> > order. 
> > 
> > If you don't like it and think it's useless - it's ok with me -
> I'll
> > continue using the patched version. And I'll re-apply the patch
> every
> > time I update the sources from the SVN and get a conflict. For 1
> patch
> > it's manageable. For 10 - it's still manageable. For 100 - it's
> > impossible. I'll just have to switch to some other product. 
> > 
> > But that is actually opposing the open source theory, which says
> > "Everybody can contribute by writing code, sharing experience,
> business
> > knowhow, ideas and etc, etc, etc". 
> > 
> > Now if you give me a reason ( or a list of reasons ) why the
> feature
> > I've proposed should not be accepted - I'll be glad with it and
> I'll
> > forget about it forever and ever.
> > 
> > I agree that it's a minor priority patch for you guys. 
> > But the priority is slightly bigger for me. 
> > 
> > What I have done so far was: 
> > 
> > 1) Identify the problem. 
> > 2) Propose a solution.
> > 3) Initiate a discussion
> > 4) Hope that the solution is accepted or a better one is proposed. 
> > 
> > Currently we're on step 3) as my solution was not accepted and a
> better
> > one was not proposed. 
> > 
> > So - I'm eager to move to step 4). The "change the 1099 port"
> workaround
> > is definitely not a better solution :)
> > 
> > Cheers, 
> > Deyan 
> > 
> > 
> > On Mon, 2009-05-25 at 08:12 -0700, BJ Freeman wrote:
> > > The way I chose was to use ajp and change those ports. This makes
> > > updating from the SVN easier.
> > >
> http://docs.ofbiz.org/display/OFBIZ/FAQ+-+Tips+-+Tricks+-+Cookbook+-+HowTo#FAQ-Tips-Tricks-Cookbook-HowTo-HTTPD
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Ashish Vijaywargiya sent the following on 5/25/2009 5:56 AM:
> > > > Below is my post dated May 21, 2009 on the user mailing list on
> the User
> > > > Mailing list.
> > > > I guess you have missed my reply.
> > > > Please read the details, give it a try and if got stuckup
> somewhere then
> > > > come back to discuss the things.
> > > > 
> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > Yes this can be easily done in OFBiz.
> > > > 
> > > > Open ofbiz-containers.xml file.
> > > > (framework/base/config/ofbiz-containers.xml)
> > > > Change the value of port in all the property by name "port". For
> ex. you
> > > > can change http port from 8080 to 28080
> > > > 
> > > > Then open url.property file.
> (framework/webapp/config/url.properties)
> > > > Keep the value of http & https port same as you set in the
> > > > ofbiz-containers.xml file.
> > > > 
> > > > So now we have two instance of OFBiz server on the same
> machine.
> > > > 
> > > > -- One is running on 8080 & another one is running on 28080
> port.
> > > > 
> > > > For accessing the same database you should keep the settings of
> database
> > > > same in entityengine.xml file.
> > > > This is all from my side.
> > > > 
> > > > Now its your turn to give it a try and if got stuck up somewhere
> in b/w
> > > > then shoot an email on mailing list.
> > > > Thanks !
> > > > 
> > > 
> >

Mime
View raw message