We will work without conflicting. I am going to touch the startup problem. I mean if a module kept in hot deployment directory is already deployed, the server should not deploy the module again during the startup. Currently the server try to deploy the module again and throws exception. i already created a JIRA ID (GERONIMO-1982) for this.
Rakesh Ranjan
On 5/4/06, Aaron Mulder <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
For purposes of the hot deployer functionality, forget that the SFHD
even exists. It is a special case feature, and does not at all
replace what the hot deploy directory does.
However, for purposes of updatng the hot deployer implementation, you
may want to refer to the SFHD implementation.
I'll probably be touching the hot deployer to add a feature so that if
an app is undeployed some other way the hot deployer will delete it
from its directory. Hopefully we can both work on this without
conflicting, since we'll be looking at different aspects of it.
Thanks,
Aaron
On 5/4/06, Rakesh Ranjan < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks Joe.
>
> Still i have some confusions.
>
> Is SFHD the substitute for the DirectoryHotDeployer ? If it is substitute,
> then do we need to disable the hotdeployment GBean for the working of SFHD?
> What is the meaning of "It monitors just one directory for one deployable
> element" ?
>
> Rakesh Ranjan
>
>
>
>
>
> On 5/4/06, Joe Bohn < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> >
> > SFHD is similar to hot deployer but has these differences:
> >
> > - It is not an integrated part of the server itself. It is a gbean
> > itself that must be deployed into the server to use it.
> > - It only takes action when the SFHD gbean is started (which is
> > typically during server startup). Hot Deploy monitors files for
> > changes at any time.
> > - It monitors just one directory for one deployable element
> > - It controls the life-cycle of the element it deploys. I'm not sure
> > if hot deploy does this as well. For example, a war deployed via this
> > mechanism is not added to the server config.xml for auto-start.
> >
> > You might want to consider my patches to SFHD as well included in
> > geronmio-1946
> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1946 .
> > These haven't been blessed by Dain yet so they may change some.
> >
> > Joe
> >
> >
> > Rakesh Ranjan wrote:
> > > Can anybody please tell me the purpose of SingleFileHotDeploy service.
> > > Is it same as the purpose of hot deployment directory?
> > >
> > > Rakesh Ranjan
> > >
> > > On 5/4/06, *Dain Sundstrom* < [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]>>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > I suggest you start by reading the SingleFileHotDeploy service I
> > > wrote last week. It uses the most recent apis.
> > >
> > > -dain
> > >
> > > On May 3, 2006, at 10:30 PM, Rakesh Ranjan wrote:
> > >
> > > > I have seen the same problems with Geronimo-1.1-SNAPSHOT also. So
> i
> > > > will create JIRA ID for these two issues and start working.
> > > > Rakesh Ranjan
> > > >
> > > > On 5/4/06, Aaron Mulder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > <mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
> > > > Please do any work in the 1.1 branch. Right now 1.2 is in a very
> > > > uncertain state. Though, I suspect the issues will be different
> in
> > > > 1.1, so you may want to start by testing the same things there.
> > > >
> > > > IIRC, the hot deployer does not yet check the timestamp of the
> > > > deployments in it its directory during startup and compare those
> to
> > > > the timestamps of the current modules to determine whether an
> > > existing
> > > > file there is the same as ever or a new version was copied in
> while
> > > > the server was down. That should be doable in 1.1.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Aaron
> > > >
> > > > On 5/4/06, Rakesh Ranjan < [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > <mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
> > > > > Thanks Aaron for the quick response.
> > > > > Here are two issues with Geronimo-1.2-SNAPSHOT which need to
> be
> > > > fixed :
> > > > > 1. When Geronimo starts, it try to deploy the modules in the
> hot
> > > > deployment
> > > > > directory even if that module is already deployed. Since the
> > > > application is
> > > > > already deployed, it throws an error : the application already
> > > > exists in the
> > > > > server.
> > > > >
> > > > > 2. Geronimo is not able to deploy the database plans kept in
> the
> > > > hot
> > > > > deployment directory.
> > > > >
> > > > > Rakesh Ranjan
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 5/4/06, Aaron Mulder < [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > <mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
> > > > > > You're welcome to look at that. Can you list the issues
> you're
> > > > going
> > > > > > to attempt to fix? There seems to be a lot of variation in
> what
> > > > > > people think the problems actually are.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Aaron
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 5/4/06, Rakesh Ranjan < [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > <mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I have not seen much activity in hot deployment directory
> > > > enhancement.
> > > > > I
> > > > > > > have seen there are some bugs in the current implementation
> > > > of hot
> > > > > > > deployment directory. I am interested to work on this
> > > > enhancement. So i
> > > > > want
> > > > > > > to know the current status of this enhancement? Is some
> other
> > > > member
> > > > > working
> > > > > > > on this issue?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Rakesh
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Joe Bohn
> > joe.bohn at earthlink.net
> >
> > "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep, to gain what he cannot
> > lose." -- Jim Elliot
> >
>
>
