Re: Restructure container(s) at wicketstuff.org server?

[Sebastiaan van Erk]

Martijn Dashorst wrote:

On 5/18/08, Sebastiaan van Erk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Hmm, what's wrong with redeploy without restarting tomcat. :-)

This just doesn't work.
1. permgen space errors

Shouldn't that be garbage collected as well?

2. reboot of server takes >2minutes
3. VM size > 2G is also very resource unfriendly for the GC
4. fast redeploy is very welcome

Regards,
Sebastiaan

I don't know, I'm running with tomcat 6.0.16 for a while now and do hot redeploys all the time. I can't remember when I last had to restart tomcat... I guess it's a bit of a tradeoff and should be tested, but if it works I'd prefer redeploy to tomcat restarts... Especially small apps like teatime shouldn't be a problem to just redeploy without restart shouldn't they?

 And you can still think of partitioning it in 2 VM's if one is going to
have to be updated many times, but the rest is relatively stable...

 A huge number of VM's is just not very resource friendly... :-(

 Regards,
 Sebastiaan


 Martijn Dashorst wrote:

Because I don't want to shut down jira, confluence, teamcity and so
forth when deploying the examples.

Martijn

On 5/18/08, Sebastiaan van Erk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Why not go with 1 VM and just use Tomcat's virtual hosting. Using

aliases

in apache you only need 1 virtual host (because it has to do the same

thing

for every host anyway, and that is forward to tomcat).

 Regards,
 Sebastiaan


 Johan Compagner wrote:

vm's? how many?

vm's have 1 problem that they all need an excact amount of memory that
they will consume. And the server has now 3G but that doesnt mean that
we can run many vm's on it that all are running tomcat.. Because for
that every vm must be configured to have a bit memory, atleast between
512M en 1G.

I would just say if we want multiply instances then every thing that
is pretty static can be in one

(teatime/repo/jira/teamcity/doc) and

all the examples could go into another. I dont see more gain in having
it split up even more.


On 5/18/08, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Well, it would make adding VMs set up to run a "site" very easy.

They

would all look the same (tomcat/jetty, JDK, svn, etc.).  So, you'd
know exactly where to go to make changes.  I use Apache virtual

hosts

at home, too, but I don't have that many domains set up (I have 2 I
think).  Setting up a new instance of Tomcat/Jetty for each one of
these sites and maintaining the proxy forwards in Apache can be a
PITA.  That's just my $0.02.  The sites shouldn't need that much
memory anyway (JIRA/TeamCity might require more of course).

On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 8:15 AM, Timo Rantalaiho

<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

wrote:

On Sun, 18 May 2008, James Carman wrote:

How about setting them up as VMs?

This might require partitioning the memory statically for
each virtual server. I think that name-based virtual hosts
by Apache on the front would probably be the most cost-
effective solution.

Best wishes,
Timo

--
Timo Rantalaiho
Reaktor Innovations Oy    <URL: http://www.ri.fi/ >

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature