Reka, Great, I’ll continue testing various scenarios as well. Btw, one question, why did you define the subgroups at the application level (group1) and not in group1 itself ? Would it behave differently ? I am not entirely clear when to use the subgroups in a group definition and when to use it at the application level ?
Thanks Martin From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Isuru Haththotuwa Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2014 5:25 AM To: Reka Thirunavukkarasu Cc: dev; Martin Eppel (meppel); Udara Liyanage Subject: Re: [Grouping][testing] Hierarchical Monitors with Composite Application Hi Reka, Great news!! I tried with a similar Application, however there were no instance spawned for the top level Cartridge. But, both the Groups were successfully activated. Might be an issue with the definitions I used, have attached there here. Will check on this more. On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 11:09 AM, Reka Thirunavukkarasu <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Hi all, I have tested the hierarchical monitors with the attached sample application which has group2 and tomcat cartridge as in top level. group2 further refers to tomcat and group1. group1 further refers to php. Their startup order has also defined in the definitions as below mentioned: For Eg: app (group2, tomcat) implies that group2 should be started before tomcat. The application structure is like: --------------- app (group2, tomcat)---------------- | | --------group2 (group1, tomcat)------- tomcat | | tomcat group1 | php For the above composite application structure, Application successfully became active after its children activated according to the start up order definied. Please find the samples as attached. If you encounter any issue while testing, can you update the thread? Thanks, Reka -- Reka Thirunavukkarasu Senior Software Engineer, WSO2, Inc.:http://wso2.com, Mobile: +94776442007 -- <tel:%2B94776442007> Thanks and Regards, Isuru H. <tel:%2B94776442007> +94 716 358 048<tel:%2B94776442007>
