Did my previous email make any sense?

Is the recommendation to install separate servers because of JVM isolation,
or is there another reason?


On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 11:25 AM, chris snow <[email protected]> wrote:

> What is the driver for recommending to install separate servers for each
> product?  In production environments, having separate JVMs is more robust,
> but this is too heavy weight for development environments.
>
> Therefore, I'm thinking we should allow an administrator to deploy
> multiple features to a single carbon instance if required.  If JVM
> isolation is required by the administrator, then a LXC container could be
> created for each server instance that requires its own JVM.
>
> I think this approach is similar to that taken by the Ubuntu tomcat
> package.  An administrator would install one tomcat instance (apt-get
> install tomcat).  Multiple wars can be deployed to the single tomcat
> instance, for example in a development environment.  Prod environments
> could use lxc to install multiple tomcats to give each war its own jvm if
> required.
>
> Does this make sense?
> On 8 Jan 2014 06:36, "Geeth Munasinghe" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> +1 Interesting idea. I think installing features on carbon kernel will
>> not be flexible thing here. Instead we should package a single server to
>> install. Because if some one wants to install both ESB and App Server as
>> separate servers on the same machine, then person has to install carbon
>> kernal twice and install set of features on them.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Geeth
>>
>>
>> *G. K. S. Munasinghe*
>> *Software Engineer,*
>> *WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com <http://wso2.com/> *
>> *lean.enterprise.middleware.*
>>
>> email: [email protected]
>> phone:(+94) 777911226
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 11:47 AM, Nirmal Fernando <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Chris,
>>>
>>> The idea is very interesting indeed. Thanks for bringing it up. If you
>>> have a look at p2-profile's pom of a product, you would get an idea about
>>> the set of features that are required by that product.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 1:49 AM, chris snow <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Lasantha,
>>>>
>>>> I'm hoping that it would be possible to automate installing carbon core
>>>> and also automate installing features.
>>>>
>>>> My hope is that features would be able to coexist on the same carbon
>>>> core platform without interfering with each other.
>>>>
>>>> It should be up to the administrator to decide which features to
>>>> install together, for example to install AS and BPS should be as simple as:
>>>>
>>>> $ apt-get install wso2-as wso2-bps
>>>>
>>>> The distribution's standard locations should be used, e.g.
>>>> /etc/wso2/as/... for configuration files, and /var/log for log files.
>>>>
>>>> Many thanks,
>>>> Chris
>>>> On 7 Jan 2014 09:08, "Lasantha Fernando" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Chris,
>>>>>
>>>>> Looks interesting. In your approach, are you planning to automate
>>>>> installing features on top of a carbon-kernel to get the relevant features
>>>>> for a product?
>>>>>
>>>>>  Also, how would it work if installing multiple WSO2 products, or
>>>>> different product features on top of a single carbon kernel?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Lasantha
>>>>>
>>>>> On 7 January 2014 02:12, chris snow <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Today I was thinking of more examples to help explain my previous
>>>>>> email.  Here is one example from the eclipse world:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Package: eclipse-jdt (3.8.0~rc4-1) -
>>>>>> http://packages.debian.org/wheezy/eclipse-jdt
>>>>>>
>>>>>> dep: default-jre  Standard Java or Java compatible Runtime
>>>>>> or java5-runtime  virtual package provided by default-jre,
>>>>>> gcj-4.6-jre, gcj-4.7-jre, gcj-jre, openjdk-6-jre, openjdk-7-jre
>>>>>> or java6-runtime  virtual package provided by default-jre,
>>>>>> openjdk-6-jre, openjdk-7-jre
>>>>>>
>>>>>> dep: eclipse-platform (>= 3.8.0~rc4-1) Eclipse platform without
>>>>>> development plug-ins
>>>>>> ..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Therefore:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> $ apt-get install eclipse-jdt   # eclipse-jdt 3.8.0~rc4-1 also
>>>>>> installs eclipse-platform >= 3.8.0~rc4-1
>>>>>>
>>>>>> With chunk releases for Carbon 4.2+ being backward compatible, could
>>>>>> the same principle be applied:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> $ apt-get install wso2-as   # wso2-as 5.0 also installs
>>>>>> wso2-core-platform >= 4.20
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 3:46 PM, chris snow <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Has anyone ever looked at creating native linux platform installers
>>>>>>> for WSO2 products?  For example:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - DEB for debian based distros
>>>>>>> - RPM for redhat based distros
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've been thinking of how the tomcat package works on ubuntu where
>>>>>>> the latest major version (e.g. 7) completely replaces the previous 
>>>>>>> version.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> However, from what I understand, wso2 features require a certain
>>>>>>> "major + minor version + minimum chunk" version of Carbon so there would
>>>>>>> need to be a packaged version of Carbon for each supported Carbon 
>>>>>>> release,
>>>>>>> for example:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - wso2-carbon-core-42.deb
>>>>>>> - wso2-carbon-core-50.deb
>>>>>>> - wso2-carbon-core-51.deb
>>>>>>> - etc
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> However, products with a different "major + minor" version
>>>>>>> wso2-carbon-core-42, wso2-carbon-core-50, and wso2-carbon-core-51 could
>>>>>>> co-exist as they would be considered different packages (though ports 
>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>> need to be selected as to avoid clashing).  With the approach, you could
>>>>>>> perform the following to install 4.2.x and 5.0.x side by side:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> apt-get install wso2-carbon-core-42.deb
>>>>>>> apt-get install wso2-carbon-core-50.deb
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> An increase in the chunk version would cause the package to be
>>>>>>> upgraded (much the same as apt-get upgrade).  For example, version of
>>>>>>>  wso2-carbon-core-42.deb (version chunk 2) would upgrade a previous
>>>>>>> installation of wso2-carbon-core-42.deb (version chunk 1).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> WSO2 products could be installed on top of the carbon core base as
>>>>>>> features, where there the feature has a dependency on the appropriate
>>>>>>> version of Carbon, for example:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - wso2-as-52.deb would have a dependency on wso2-carbon-core-42.deb
>>>>>>> (version chunk 1+)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Does this approach make sense?  Would it work?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Many thanks,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Chris
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Check out my professional profile and connect with me on LinkedIn.
>>>>>> http://lnkd.in/cw5k69
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Architecture mailing list
>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> *Lasantha Fernando*
>>>>> Software Engineer - Data Technologies Team
>>>>> WSO2 Inc. http://wso2.com
>>>>>
>>>>> email: [email protected]
>>>>> mobile: (+94) 71 5247551
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Architecture mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Architecture mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Thanks & regards,
>>> Nirmal
>>>
>>> Senior Software Engineer- Platform Technologies Team, WSO2 Inc.
>>> Mobile: +94715779733
>>> Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Architecture mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Architecture mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>
>>


-- 
Check out my professional profile and connect with me on LinkedIn.
http://lnkd.in/cw5k69
_______________________________________________
Architecture mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture

Reply via email to