Return-Path: 
 <tomcat-dev-return-13817-qmlist-jakarta-archive-tomcat-dev=jakarta.apache.org@jakarta.apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-tomcat-dev-archive@apache.org
Received: (qmail 1673 invoked from network); 25 Jun 2002 17:53:03 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO nagoya.betaversion.org) (192.18.49.131)
  by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 25 Jun 2002 17:53:03 -0000
Received: (qmail 21665 invoked by uid 97); 25 Jun 2002 17:53:06 -0000
Delivered-To: qmlist-jakarta-archive-tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org
Received: (qmail 21648 invoked by uid 97); 25 Jun 2002 17:53:06 -0000
Mailing-List: contact tomcat-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:tomcat-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:tomcat-dev-subscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tomcat-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
List-Id: "Tomcat Developers List" <tomcat-dev.jakarta.apache.org>
Reply-To: "Tomcat Developers List" <tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Delivered-To: mailing list tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org
Received: (qmail 21635 invoked by uid 98); 25 Jun 2002 17:53:05 -0000
X-Antivirus: nagoya (v4198 created Apr 24 2002)
Message-ID: <3D18ADF5.3070406@apache.org>
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 10:52:53 -0700
From: Remy Maucherat <remm@apache.org>
Organization: ASF
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;
 rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020530
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Tomcat Developers List <tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Subject: Re: HA tomcat ( was: RE: 5.0 proposal)
References: 
 <Pine.LNX.4.44.0206250936550.11573-100000@costinm.sfo.covalent.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Rating: localhost.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N
X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N
X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N

costinm@covalent.net 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.

Remy


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:tomcat-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:tomcat-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>