On Feb 8, 2008, at 1:02 AM, Daniel López wrote:

> Hi,
> Scott Ferguson escribió:
>> On Feb 7, 2008, at 9:27 AM, Daniel Lopez wrote:
>>> Would then be the recommended way to work to set all watchdog  
>>> ports on
>>> all resin.conf files to be the same one? I'm thinking that might be
>>> causing some of the issues as "side effect".
>> It currently defaults to use the same one.  I'm not sure I  
>> understand.
> Ummm my bad, the port I'm configuring different for each instance is  
> the
> "server port":
> <server id="InstanceX" address="" port="660X"/>
> I confused the concepts. That is probably the port used by the  
> watchdog
> process to contact this server instance, so having it different on  
> each
> instance is the right way to go.

That's the cluster port for the Resin server.  It's used for load- 
balancing, distributed sessions, distributed management, etc.  The  
watchdog doesn't actually use that port at all.
> I understand now, thanks to Bill Au's reminder, that in order to  
> change
> the watchdog port, there's another setting.
> However, that would probably mean 2 JMV instances per "server", right?

Unfortunately, yes.

> One for the watchdog process and another for the app. server itself.
> That would probably be too much overhead, as having many perl  
> processes
> was a not a problem before, but JVM processes are not that light :).

I should take a look to see if we can reduce the size of that  
process.  The watchdog itself isn't doing much (which is the whole  
point of a watchdog process.)

> So I'll wait for the issues to be dealt with, and then stay with one
> watchdog process and several instances.

-- Scott
> Thanks all for your help,
> D.
> _______________________________________________
> resin-interest mailing list
> resin-interest@caucho.com
> http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest

resin-interest mailing list

Reply via email to