With Rex's latest commit for GERONIMO-5987, and testing with geronimo-tomcat7-javaee6-3.0-20110923.091022-350-bin, I am able to run multiple instances of the Geronino javaee6 bundle now.
To make it work, you have to follow my specific startup procedure I gave in GERONIMO-5987 which refers to an example I put into the Wiki page https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GMOxDOC30/Running+multiple+Geronimo+instances . We're still having a minor issue with conflicting ActiveMQ lock files (actually the ActiveMQ working directory) if you do not startup the Geronimo instances in a particular way. Jeff and Forrest I am able to start up multiple instances of the javaee6 bundle now, but I have not tested extended operation of them. Do you two know of any other issues preventing a successful operation of multiple instances within a single runtime OS as I outlined in the Wiki page example I referenced above? -RG On 09/22/2011 11:03 AM, Russell E Glaue wrote: > It should be noted that as long as JIRA GERONIMO-5987 goes unresolved, even if > you install several copies of Geronimo into different file structure locations > (e.g. /opt/g1 and /opt/g2), the javaee6 bundle does not allow multiple > Geronimo > servers to run within the same runtime OS. > > GERONIMO-5987 is the open issue for the ActiveMQ port configuration. Currently > ActiveMQ listens on port 61616 and you cannot change that in any > configuration. > Thus prohibiting anymore than one Geronimo javaee6 server from running on a > single runtime OS. > > I just updated JIRA GERONIMO-5987 to reflect the current status of the issue, > which has made a small step forward by listing the ActiveMQ service and actual > bind port (opposed to the configured bind port) in the Geronimo startup > output. > > -RG > > > On 09/22/2011 04:29 AM, chi runhua wrote: >> The way by sharing the repository or certain folders is not enabled in 3.0 >> yet. >> To run multiple instances on one machine, the only way is to copy the server >> folder to another place on the disk, and then start the server after changing >> the offPortset value in config-substitutions.properties file. >> >> Jeff C >> >> On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 4:27 PM, Forrest Xia <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> 3.0 does not have the feature like the doc for multiple instances >> support. >> The doc needs update. >> >> Forrest >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 11:03 PM, Russell E Glaue <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> AFAIK, we still have a desire to support multiple instances per >> Geronimo >> base >> install. >> >> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/GMOxDOC30/running-multiple-geronimo-instances.html >> >> We have been working towards a common configuration location in 3.0 >> trunk for >> all parts of Geronimo. >> >> I am expecting to test and use multiple instances with the 3.0 >> release. >> >> -RG >> >> >> On 09/20/2011 10:08 PM, Rex Wang wrote: >> > 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] >> <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected] >> <mailto:[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] >> <mailto:[email protected]> >> > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[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 <http://apache.org> <http://apache.org> >> >> >>
