If we want to continue maintain such complexity in 3.0? Hard drive is pretty cheap nowadays.
And I think currently the part that looks a little bit wasting space is karaf "copy" the artifacts from repository to cache when start.. -Rex 2011/9/21 Forrest Xia <[email protected]> > This idea is like the multiple instances feature we had in 2.1 branch, but > not supported in trunk now. > > Geronimo 2.1.x support copying "var" folder to add more instances with a > same installation, but G trunk code does not support that feature now. > > Do we have a user scenario to mandate that feature for 3.x? > > Regards, > Forrest > > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 1:55 AM, Jarek Gawor <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> In Geronimo binary install which directories do we consider read-only >> vs. write/read? The idea is that the read-only directories could be >> shared among multiple installations to save some space and reduce >> maintenance. >> >> Here's what I identified so far: >> >> read-only: >> - bin >> - jsr88 >> - schema >> - lib >> >> read/write: >> - deploy >> - hotbundles >> - etc >> - var >> >> The repository/ directory is a little weird because parts of it could >> be considered read-only and some write. I wonder if maybe we should >> have separate repository directories one for Geronimo bundles and >> another one for applications. >> >> Thanks, >> Jarek >> > > -- Lei Wang (Rex) rwonly AT apache.org
