Hi,
On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 11:07 AM Sarubi Thillainathan <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hi Chamila,
>
> According to the offline discussion with Nuwan,
> Here what we are doing is, automate configuration changes to optimize
> API-M profiles. Up to now, it has been manually done by users [1] when
> they wanted to run a selected profile.
>
> We provide two options to accomplish this,
> 1. The user can do the optimization separately before the server starts up
> by run the profileSetup.sh along with a particular profile flag. (ex:
> profileSetup.sh -Dprofile=api-store ) Once it has done, can use this APIM
> package as the root image for CM tools.
>

This creates a new distribution (.zip) file for the intended profile
without altering the current distribution? Or it alters the current
distribution it self? i.e, Let's say I have downloaded and extracted APIM,
now I have to create api-store and api-publisher profiles. So, should I
extract the distributions two times and run this commands seperately
profileSetup.sh -Dprofile=api-store and profileSetup.sh
-Dprofile=api-publisher in two extracted directories?

Thanks,
Sinthuja.

>
> 2. The user can start the wso2server.sh with a particular profile along
> with --optimize flag.
> (i.e) wso2server.sh --optimize -Dprofile=api-store.
> if and only -optimize flag found we do the optimization for that
> particular profile then start the server automatically, otherwise not.
>
> Please find inline comments for further details:
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 4:11 AM, Chamila De Alwis <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Sarubi,
>>
>> I have a couple of questions regarding the fit between the changes that
>> this script does and the config automation tools.
>>
>> Is this a tool focused on evaluation part of the product or the
>> deployment part? IMO both would require a re-evaluation of the approach.
>>
>
> This is focused on deployment part of product.
>
>>
>> IIUC, this script would alter the startup pack, with file additions and
>> removals done to config files, deployable artifacts, and other library
>> files. This could be a problematic case for continuous config automation
>> story.
>>
>> Consider a scenario where Puppet (or any other tool) configures a set of
>> instances, using the APIM pack as the root. The tool might be configured to
>> continuously run (say, with a 30-minute interval). Is there a chance for
>> the server to be reconfigured every time the tool is run, because the tool
>> detects the changes that this script does at the startup, as changes that
>> should be rolled back?
>>
>
> According to the scenario that you have mentioned, Puppet (or any other
> tool) can configures a set of instances, using optimized APIM pack as the
> root.
>
>
>> In that case, it might be better to have this tool as a separate script
>> rather than one which starts up the server as well.
>>
>
> Yes, now we maintain a seperate script which will get executed based on
> the user specification for server start-up.
>
>>
>> Another point against such a tool bound to server startup would be the
>> mixing of concerns. AFAIU, what this script does falls under what the
>> config automation tools do. IMO WSO2 server startup scripts should only
>> work on the bootstrapping of the server runtime, rather than the config
>> automation part. Also, we would essentially be repeating what the config
>> automation tools should do, but in Bash which sometimes is a lot harder.
>> Obtaining config values, managing them meaningfully, and applying them to
>> files is essentially what a config automation tool does. We may be
>> re-inventing the wheel here. For an example, should this tool be concerned
>> about the port offset at all since even dev deployments will be done using
>> separate VMs/Containers? Or should it be worried about different values for
>> the config options in different environments?
>>
>> Also, this script don't concerned about the port offset things since it
> designed only to configure the changes for corresponding profile specified.
>
>
>> Additionally, users who manage config automation usually adhere to one
>> set of scripts. Puppet users almost always go for Puppet, Chef users for
>> Chef etc. What we would be delivering might step on what they already have,
>> or are comfortable working with, and in turn, the adaption rate might take
>> a hit.
>>
>> User can go with first option, run the profile setup script seperatly
> before server start up and get optimized API-M pack as the base image
>
>
>> IMO you might benefit from reviewing your approach with the Installation
>> Experience effort, as the responsibilities of this tool fall close to, if
>> not overlap with, what the Installation Experience scripts deliver/would
>> deliver with different providers.
>>
>> WDYT?
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Chamila de Alwis
>> Committer and PMC Member - Apache Stratos
>> Associate Technical Lead | WSO2
>> +94 77 220 7163
>> Blog: https://medium.com/@chamilad
>>
>>
> Commnets or suggestions are highly appreciated.
>
> [1]https://docs.wso2.com/display/AM220/Product+Profiles
>
>
> --
> *Sarubi Thillainathan *
> *Software Engineer - WSO2 Inc.*
>
> *Mobile : +94 (0) 76 68 49 101*
> _______________________________________________
> Architecture mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>


-- 
*Sinthuja Rajendran*
Senior Technical Lead
WSO2, Inc.:http://wso2.com

Blog: http://sinthu-rajan.blogspot.com/
Mobile: +94774273955
_______________________________________________
Architecture mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture

Reply via email to