tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Remy Maucherat <>
Subject Re: HA tomcat ( was: RE: 5.0 proposal)
Date Tue, 25 Jun 2002 17:52:53 GMT wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Jun 2002, GOMEZ Henri wrote:
>>>>Pier could you detail what should be a Tomcat HA, and how
>>>>it could fit in TC 5.0 proposal ?
>>>As far as I can remember it was voted -1...
>>What about TC 5.0 with HA capability ?
> TC5.0 will have a 'higher availability' then 4.1 which is better
> than 4.0. Same goes for 3.3 versus 3.2, and so on. 
> <rant -stop reading if you're not interested in flames -->
> I am trying as hard as possible to remain calm and on the 
> subject when discussing with 'angry' Pier - but the FUD he 
> is using is unbelievable.
> He can't use tomcat4.0 in production ? Maybe he's trying to
> do that with mod_webapp ( with no load balancing AFAIK, and 
> 'auto configuration' ). And he complains about features - 
> well, Apache is full of features, and most people know how
> to not enable the modules that they don't need on a production
> site. 
> Now he proposes a "HA tomcat" - as if all our efforts in 
> so far has been in adding useless features and nobody else
> cares about HA. Well, if you would pay attention a lot of 
> work is beeing put in improving the lb ( an essential factor 
> for HA ), in adding management ( guess what - JMX is not only
> for configuration, but also for getting runtime info and notifications ),
> and in improving the low-level objects to beter deal with the load
> ( that's coyote ) plus for 5.0 a simpler core that would allow
> more modularity ( coyote again ).
> And the solution he proposes:  removing 'useless' features like
> jasper or JMX. 
> Well, I know quite a few people who managed to get tomcat in
> production on a variety of sites ( including very large loads). 
> Even with tomcat3.2 - a generation behind the current 3.3 and 4.0.
> They do that using load balancing and customizing the installation.
> Unfortunately Pier's tomcat4.0 doesn't support load balancing,
> and it seems he's having problems with the admin module of 4.1.
> Well, send a patch - or just disable the offending module in 
> your code. 
> Tomcat out-of-box is feature full and more intended for developers
> ( who greatly outnumber the 'production sites'). If you read
> the 5.0 proposal, it allows ( or includes ) the ability to 
> release customized tomcats. 
> Of course, nobody stops Pier on working on whatever he wants - 
> a -1 means he can't do it in the main branch and he can't use 
> the name 'tomcat', but the proposal/ area has allwasy been open.
> If he can get a 'higher availability' than we'll get with 5.0 - 
> great, we'll all be happy.
> But now Pier treatens he'll just leave us oprhapns ( without 
> a father). I certainly hope he's not serious with that, and if he
> does - I hope he'll return. And in the meantime he may try to
> learn to be a bit more polite and modest - and control his 
> frustrations. 
> </rant>

Even omitting personal comments from the rant (which I have to admit I 
share), you did a sooo impressive work on improving Tomcat HA-level 
during the 3.0-3.1-3.2-3.3 releases that I definitely trust you to help 
take Tomcat 5.0 to the next HA-level.

On a side note, it would be really nice if Tomcat developers could STOP 
writing blanket FUD-style statements about whatever module / the 
container / etc when they didn't even care to review the code.


To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

View raw message